Hi, Eric,

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:

> I can live with any of these.
>

As can I. I can live with no change, but another SDO has already sent us a
love note about the charter asking why we hate them because we want to
compete with them, quoting the word "competitive".

Anything that makes liaison relationships settle down seems helpful.


> Just trying to get to yes.
>

Speaking for me, you've got that. I balloted Yes without holding out for
the change :-)

Spencer


> -Ekr
>
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 7:29 AM, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>  Comparable and competitive express the same goal with slightly
>> different connotations. Comparable sounds more neutral / objective. Neither
>> express “outperform” as Keith suggests. There was indeed BoF discussion
>> around the desire to “outperform”, but no consensus to require this in the
>> charter, hence “competitive”.
>>
>>  I prefer “Has comparable performance”, just to avoid any
>> misinterpretation or connotation of “Is competitive”. But I don’t think
>> either language will really matter all that much. Concerns in other SDOs
>> are unlikely to be alleviated with any charter language.
>>
>>  Mo
>>
>>   On 5/13/15, 9:31 AM, Eric Rescorla <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>   I honestly don't care about this, but how about "having competitive
>> performance"
>>
>>  -Ekr
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 6:29 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I do not believe that we do mean the same.
>>>
>>> This got a little discussion in the BOF, but I see liitle point in
>>> developing a codec where the only selling point is a claimed royalty free,
>>> something that can never be guaranteed.
>>>
>>> Therefore I certainly would like to see the aim of development to be
>>> something that is in some aspect better, and thus competitive, rather than
>>> just the same, as in comparable. Maybe we can find another word, but I am
>>> unhappy with comparable.
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: video-codec [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>> > Behalf Of Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
>>> > Sent: 13 May 2015 13:21
>>> > To: Spencer Dawkins
>>> > Cc: [email protected]; The IESG
>>> > Subject: Re: [video-codec] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on
>>> > charter-ietf-netvc-00-03: (with COMMENT)
>>> >
>>> > I support removing "competitive" to avoid any
>>> > misinterpretation. Since we mean "comparable", we should just
>>> > say so directly rather than parenthetically.
>>> >
>>> > Mo
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On May 13, 2015, at 1:38 AM, Spencer Dawkins
>>> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
>>> > charter-ietf-netvc-00-03: Yes
>>> >
>>> > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and
>>> > reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines.
>>> > (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
>>> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-netvc/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > COMMENT:
>>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> > I don't know if the cat is too far out of the bag for this to
>>> > matter, but
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > "1. Is competitive (in the sense of having comparable
>>> > performance) with current video codecs in widespread use."
>>> >
>>> > has already piqued the interest of our dear friends at
>>> > another SDO. Is it possible to pick a less interesting word
>>> > than "competitive" here and elsewhere in the charter?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > video-codec mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > video-codec mailing list
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec
>>> >
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> video-codec mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec
>>>
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
video-codec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec

Reply via email to