On 2016-05-10 12:03, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > > obviously this situtation has led to some confusion, as there now are > two UUIDs, one of them being documented in a published paper, and the > other being promoted by a reference implementation. > > i would therefore like to persuade all parties interested in using ambix > to use a single (valid) UUID. > obviously my preference is to drop the nachbar-UUID and use > "1AD318C3-00E5-5576-BE2D-0DCA2460BC89".
all this is an attempt to resolve the issue brought up recently by Fons: > Another matter: what is the 'official' definition of IEM's > Ambix format ? Problem is that I find contradicting info. > > There's the paper: > > <http://iem.kug.ac.at/fileadmin/media/iem/projects/2011/ambisonics11_nachbar_zotter_sontacchi_deleflie.pdf> > > and the source code on Github: > > <https://github.com/umlaeute/ambix/blob/master/libambix/src/uuid_chunk.c> > > These mention different UUIDs for the extended (with matrix) format. so the main question is how widespread the use of the nachbar-UUID already is. if not, I am lobbying for an amandment. > Also in the paper it is at least suggested (Fig. 1) that the matrix > dimensions are 32-bit floating point, while the code uses 32-bit > integers (which makes sense). while it might make sense, i'm pretty sure that the implementation does follow the suggestion in the paper and uses 32-bit floating point for the embedded matrix. fgsd IOhannes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160510/7e64a3b8/attachment.asc> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
