RE: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

2010-01-21 Thread stephane.proust
In line as well : The first stage of the work has not been done yet : the detailed technical requirements have not been defined and agreed yet, the second stage of the work with other SDOs to analyse if already exiting codecs meet these requirements is not done and yet the Charter on the basis

RE: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

2010-01-19 Thread stephane.proust
Hi It is not clear for me how is handled the editing process of the Charter and how the agreement or not on the different points contained in it can be assessed ! The current version is not acceptable, at least with respect to the way relationships with other SDOs are considered by IETF :

RE: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

2010-01-15 Thread stephane.proust
Hello Obviously, the current requirements document does contain features which are not supported by today's standardized codecs. As an example, take time stretching and time compression. Thus, everybody following the discussion must come to the conclusion that (2) has been answered with