[MPEG-OTSPEC] Proposal to discontinue the AdHoc Group

[Behdad Esfahbod]

Can EVERYONE who agrees that my complaint should be heard by a fair and
impartial group of people with authority to change how OFF operates
please express their agreement via a reply please?

behdad
http://behdad.org/


On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 12:38 AM Behdad Esfahbod <behdad at behdad.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:41 PM Levantovsky, Vladimir <
> Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com> wrote:
>
>> Behdad,
>>
>>
>>
>> Asking the ISO/IEC SC29 Working Group
>>
>> > to acknowledge that the AdHoc model has NOT worked for many in the
>> industry
>>
>> is a strong request, one that cannot be made without providing any
>> substance to support it.
>>
>
> Great. Where can I submit the evidence? My allegations involve you, Peter,
> Sairus, and Greg. So the party hearing my complaints cannot include any of
> you four because conflict of interest.
>
> I've been asking you since June or July about how to file a complaint and
> you have refused to give me an answer. At the last video meeting you said
> "I don't know", but you didn't say that when I first asked you in writing.
> Instead you asked to video-call and just told me to NOT file a complaint
> because it will threaten the existence of the AHG. The existence of the AHG
> benefits you personally.
>
>
>> This is especially important when there is a strong evidence to the
>> contrary, that this work has been successfully conducted since 2004, that
>> the OFF standard (ISO/IEC 14496-22) has undergone four editions (in 2007,
>> 2009, 2015, and 2019) and numerous amendments,
>>
>
> Seriously? You, as the chair of this MOFF / AHG whatever, are so blatantly
> dismissing my allegations that there are problems? I'm a *very*
> well-established expert and prolific member of this community and I've been
> alleging for three months now that THERE IS A PROBLEM.
>
>
>
>>  and is widely adopted in the industry (see References below). While the
>> WG has been responsible for this work item, the actual work has been done
>> by the AHG.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you please elaborate on what, in your opinion, “has NOT worked”? Can
>> you point out to any instance of a technical discussion conducted in this
>> Ad-Hoc Group where a technical objection has been raised that did not
>> receive due consideration and has not been properly reflected in an AHG
>> proposal or recommendation?
>>
>
> I will to a fair and impartial group of people who have authority to make
> changes.
>
> b
>
>
>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>>
>>
>> References (list of industry standards normatively referencing ISO/IEC
>> 14496-22):
>>
>> CE / TV standards:
>>
>> 1) DCI Digital Cinema Systems Specification since 2008 by errata (most
>> recent is v. 1.3:
>> https://www.dcimovies.com/specification/DCI_DCSS_Ver1-3_2018-0627.pdf) –
>> mandates ISO/IEC 14496-22 support.
>>
>> 2) ETSI TS 103 285 V1.1.1 (2015)
>> <http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/103200_103299/103285/01.01.01_60/ts_103285v010101p.pdf>
>> Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); MPEG-DASH Profile for Transport of ISO
>> BMFF Based DVB Services over IP Based Networks (mandates both ISO/IEC
>> 14496-22 “OFF” and WOFF)
>>
>> 3) ATSC 3.0 Interactive Content (A/344:2017,
>> https://www.atsc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/A344-2017-Interactive-Content.pdf)
>> – mandates both ISO/IEC 14496-22 and WOFF (normative references [20] and
>> [35])
>>
>> 4) Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Globally Executable MHP (GEM)
>> Specification 1.3 (including OTT and hybrid broadcast/broadband) DVB
>> Document A153:
>> https://dvb.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/A153_GEM_v1_3.pdf
>> (normatively references OpenType via ISO/IEC14496-18, the predecessor of
>> ISO/IEC 14496-22). Also,
>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102700_102799/102728/01.01.01_60/ts_102728v010101p.pdf
>>
>> 5) Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Multimedia Home Platform (MHP)
>> Specification 1.2 (http://wiki.commres.org/pds/MHP/a107.MHP1.2.pdf,
>> normatively references OpenType via ISO/IEC14496-18, the predecessor of
>> ISO/IEC 14496-22).
>>
>> 6) OC-SP-OCAP 1.0-I16-050803 OpenCable Application Platform
>> Specification (mandates support for OpenType, based on DVB GEM
>> specification)
>>
>> 7) Hybrid Broadcast Broadband TV (mandates OFF and WOFF support for TTML
>> subtitles with downloadable fonts via DVB A168 MPEG-DASH profile [45], and
>> also via OIPF Web Standards TV Profile [i.6]):
>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/102700_102799/102796/01.04.01_60/ts_102796v010401p.pdf
>>
>> 8) DVB TTML subtitling systems (ETSI EN 303 560 V1.1.1 (2018-05),
>> mandates both ISO/IEC 14496-22 “OFF” [19] and WOFF [18]):
>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/303500_303599/303560/01.01.01_60/en_303560v010101p.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>> Web font standards:
>>
>> Both WOFF 1.0 (https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF/) and WOFF 2.0 (
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF2/) Recommendations normatively reference OFF
>> (ISO/IEC 14496-22).
>>
>>
>>
>> Other standards:
>>
>> 1) DICOM Standard (specifies the set of Information Object Definitions
>> (IODs) that provide an abstract definition of real-world objects applicable
>> to communication of digital medical information, normatively references
>> ISO/IEC 14496-22):
>> http://dicom.nema.org/medical/Dicom/2016c/output/chtml/part03/chapter_2.html
>>
>> 2) Dynamic and Interactive Multimedia Scenes (DIMS) (3GPP TS 26.142
>> version 7.3.0 Release 7; ETSI TS 126 142 V7.3.0 (2009-06) – mandates
>> support for ISO/IEC 14496-22, normative reference [4]):
>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/126100_126199/126142/07.03.00_60/ts_126142v070300p.pdf
>>
>> 3) OMA Rich Media Environment Technical Specification
>> (OMA-TS-RME-V1_0-20110329-A, mandates support for ISO/IEC 14496-22 -
>> normative reference [OFF]):
>> https://www.openmobilealliance.org/release/RME/V1_0-20110329-A/OMA-TS-RME-V1_0-20110329-A.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> *On Behalf Of *Behdad
>> Esfahbod
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 16, 2020 4:16 PM
>> *To:* mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
>> *Subject:* [MPEG-OTSPEC] Proposal to discontinue the AdHoc Group
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> I like to propose to the ISO WG overseeing this group to acknowledge that
>> the AdHoc model has NOT worked for many in the industry and discontinue
>> this model.
>>
>>
>>
>> Vlad, can you please add this to agenda for the next meeting of the WG?
>>
>>
>> behdad
>> http://behdad.org/
>> <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/LXgFC5yrxRh0ZjxYhzjORk/>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200921/3fd7ae19/attachment-0001.html>