On 6/17/11 3:24 AM, Florian Zeitz wrote:
> I personally don't care if Opus is in the XEP if it is in the current
> form (clearly stating the situation on IPR issues), but I think it's
> somewhat strange to include information on something that is still very
> much in flux.
Well, it's mostly based
dre [mailto:stpe...@stpeter.im]
> Sent: Friday, 17 June 2011 9:21 AM
> To: XMPP Standards
> Cc: dmex
> Subject: Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
>
> First of all, Section of XEP-0266 is purely informational -- it lists
> selected codecs that migh
On Fri Jun 17 03:44:13 2011, dmex wrote:
Am I emailing play school? One of these things is not like the
others, one of these things does not belong.
Possibly from one.
A codec that has patent issues and not finalized is something that
does not belong. End of story.
Firstly, Opus does
ds
Cc: dmex
Subject: Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
:)
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting so bad?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying behavior on email discussion lists?
On 6/16/11 7:07 PM, dmex
:)
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting so bad?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying behavior on email discussion lists?
On 6/16/11 7:07 PM, dmex wrote:
> Well this isn’t a wiki page… Considering this is the last call before
> beco
Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
There isn't one. Much of this XEP would work a lot better as a wiki page.
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 6:51 PM, dmex wrote:
What's the point of including it on the document when it's not finalized an
There isn't one. Much of this XEP would work a lot better as a wiki page.
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 6:51 PM, dmex wrote:
> What's the point of including it on the document when it's not finalized
> and
> has potential patent claims?
>
ubject: Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
On Thu Jun 16 18:26:34 2011, dmex wrote:
> Opus should not be listed until such time as its patent doubts are
> resolved and its format has been formally finalized, doing otherwise
> is stupidity at its best.
>
>
time?
-Original Message-
From: standards-boun...@xmpp.org
[mailto:standards-boun...@xmpp.org] On
Behalf Of XMPP Extensions Editor
Sent: Friday, 17 June 2011 12:25 AM
To: standards@xmpp.org
Subject: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
This message constitutes notice
[mailto:standards-boun...@xmpp.org] On
Behalf Of XMPP Extensions Editor
Sent: Friday, 17 June 2011 12:25 AM
To: standards@xmpp.org
Subject: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0266 (Codecs for Jingle Audio)
This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0266
(Codecs for Jingle Audio).
Abstract
This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0266 (Codecs
for Jingle Audio).
Abstract: This document describes implementation considerations related to
audio codecs for use in Jingle RTP sessions.
URL: http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0266.html
This Last Call begins tod
11 matches
Mail list logo
