[MPEG-OTSPEC] Introducing breaking changes into the spec (was: RE: [EXTERNAL] Proposal to deprecate derived search values)

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 3:45 PM Peter Constable <pgcon6 at msn.com> wrote:

> I wasn’t at all saying that there should not be parallel activity.
>

Great! Thanks for clarifying and apologies I misinterpreted you :)


> By “one step at a time”, all I was saying was that, before technical
> discussion of #3 (step-change improved format) happens in this list, I
> think discussion it should be preceded by discussion of business goals,
> etc. for such work.
>

>
Formally, SC29 doesn’t have any approved project for working on a new
> format, and so technical discussion of any new format is not formally in
> scope for the AHG. In terms of formal SC29 process, technical activity on
> new formats would need to be preceded by approval of a New Work Item
> Proposal (NWIP) by SC29. A NWIP is primarily about business goals and
> project plan. Now discussion on preparing a NWIP could certainly
> potentially happen here (I don’t think the scope given to the AHG by
> SC29/WGx precludes that).
>

That all makes sense; but I was under the impression that the AHG has an
extremely wide remit to discuss any relevant topics.

Vlad, what is needed to get the ball rolling on such a NWIP? What is the
end to end protocol?

But IMO I think it would be better for that to happen elsewhere. ... FTCG
> would be a better place to start preliminary discussion related to
> step-change improved formats that might eventually lead to a NWIP.


If that's where the best place is, I'm all for it. But this isn't clear to
me. I'm particuarly keen to hear from Vlad :)

Cheers
Dave

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200914/538be823/attachment-0001.html>