[MPEG-OTSPEC] Proposal to discontinue the AdHoc Group

Mon Sep 21 17:18:30 CEST 2020

On Monday, September 21, 2020 2:39 AM Behdad Esfahbod wrote:

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:41 PM Levantovsky, Vladimir <Vladimir.Levantovsky at monotype.com<mailto: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.

Fascinating! So you seem to have made an attempt to redefine the concept of a “fair trial” where people you accuse of hypothetical / ephemeral wrongdoing [without any evidence to support it] CANNOT face the accuser, is that right?

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.

It is your opinion, FWIW. I told you on multiple occasions that my biggest concern is that this group is an open and accessible resource for all members of the community who want to have their voices heard, with no barrier for entry. So yes, your allegations may hurt this group and the community it serves.
As I see it now, my attempts to reason with you were futile – both during the personal conversations and via email on this list. I said it before and I will say it again – your allegations that are not supported by any evidence (and your refusal to publicly provide evidence to this group) are, in fact, damaging to this community and to the work of the group.
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.

 “alleging” is a key word here. Your unprofessional conduct and public accusations of members of this group of wrongdoing on multiple occasions (see https://twitter.com/behdadesfahbod/status/1274744367882702848 and https://medium.com/@behdadesfahbod/violence-abuse-racism-and-colonialism-in-the-type-industry-807b7af2bbfa) didn’t go unnoticed – where is the evidence? I asked the same question first time when you asked about filing a complaint, and I repeatedly asked you again and again to substantiate your allegations. Apparently, my reluctance to accept your allegations without evidence was enough for you to target me personally.

 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.

My point exactly! So far, we’ve seen many allegations and no facts.
Vlad

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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/0jmHC4xqwzFJJRLjSOjraq>) – mandates ISO/IEC 14496-22 support.
2) ETSI TS 103 285 V1.1.1 (2015)<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/0cZsC5yrxRh00wqnHOO5eD> 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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/SUwyC68vyBsooZQ3HmKfqj>) – 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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/y4dwC73wzpCmmn3PiNAuMd> (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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/qZwwC82xAMhjjBnJIoO2Xg>
5) Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Multimedia Home Platform (MHP) Specification 1.2 (http://wiki.commres.org/pds/MHP/a107.MHP1.2.pdf<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/hmuwC9ryBDhmmroZi1gEn8>, 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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/lU2QC0Rmp0u22Y6ECLqbQC>
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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/I4YlCgJGKnTll4VgTK9fU8>

Web font standards:
Both WOFF 1.0 (https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF/<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/NuXACjRkM0ujjZp6IMndO6/>) and WOFF 2.0 (https://www.w3.org/TR/WOFF2/<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/BBaxCkRlKrunnomLcDsmlz/>) 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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/eCjDClYmL2Uoo6g9HLzMIo>
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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/ZUx_CmZn6YI55kE0HVgKus>
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<https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/twzICn5oXgsGGrMyC4Qh-r>

From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at<mailto: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<mailto: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/8viXCpYqKkUzzpXlcq25s9/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20200921/8cd934c1/attachment-0001.html>