On 9/17 Ham asked Marsha: > I'd like to hear why you think it is necessary to redefine > value in order to support the basic MoQ concept. [Marsha replied]: > There is only value. And what is that, Marsha? --Ham Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Heather Perella
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Heather Perella
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Heather Perella
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Heather Perella
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? MarshaV
- Re: [MD] subject/object: no quality? Ham Priday
