[mpeg-OTspec] RE: Final (was Tentative) schedule for the AHG meeting

[Leonardo Chiariglione]

Individuals are welcome to submit proposals

Leonardo Chiariglione, Convenor

 

Discover the WimTV potential <http://support.wim.tv/> 

 

From: mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com [mailto:mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of William_J_G Overington
Sent: Friday, 03 January, 2014 10:42
To: ostermann at tnt.uni-hannover.de; yklwhite at gmail.com; Levantovsky,
Vladimir; OTspec (mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com)
Subject: Re: [mpeg-OTspec] RE: Final (was Tentative) schedule for the AHG
meeting

 

  



> Just a friendly reminder that the responses to the Call for Proposals are
due on or before January 7, 2014, and need to be submitted via email to all
three recipients listed in the CFP.

I would have liked to have put forward ideas for consideration, but, as
things stand, I cannot.

Some readers might like to know my reasons.

The main reason is the following requirement.

quote

Proponents are advised that, upon acceptance by MPEG for further evaluation,
MPEG may require that they shall provide reference software implementations
of their proposed technologies suitable for integration in the MPEG-4
reference software by a time the OFF standard shall enter DIS stage (October
2014). By responding to this Call, Proponents agree to be bound by the
obligations contained in this point.

end quote

I am an independent researcher, doing what I can, putting forward ideas. I
do not have the facilities to produce the required software.

However, please consider the following quote.

quote

However, MPEG reserve the right to adopt none, one, or a combination of
several proposals as well as to issue another call for proposals. All
decisions will be made by consensus of the experts of MPEG. 

end quote

Please note particularly the phrase "combination of several proposals" as
that seems to imply that an idea could go forward in a combination of ideas
with - perhaps - no obligation upon the proposer of an idea to produce
software.

So the requirement to provide software seems to be too universal for
gathering ideas. Perhaps people and companies could be allowed to put
forward ideas without the requirement to provide software as long as they
say up front that software cannot be provided.

Maybe a company that could produce the software would happily agree to
implement an idea that was accepted by the committee.

Another reason is the following quote.

quote

2.    Organization (i.e., name of proposing company)

end quote

I am an independent researcher and not representing an organization.

I am unsure whether an individual contribution would be acceptable in
practice, but it does seem that it is companies only from what is in the
document.

William Overington

3 January 2014



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20140103/74d99ef2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/x-ygp-stripped
Size: 126 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20140103/74d99ef2/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/x-ygp-stripped
Size: 126 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20140103/74d99ef2/attachment-0001.bin>