Hi, stephane.proust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > The Charter states first the "The goal of this working group is to > develop a single high-quality audio codec" considering (on what basis > ?) that "there are no standardized, high-quality audio codecs that meet > all of the following three conditions" > > However in a next section it is said that "The working group will > communicate detailed description of the requirements and goals to other > SDOs including the ITU-T, 3GPP, and MPEG to help determine if existing > codecs meet the requirements" While I do think that "there are no standardized, high-quality audio codecs that meet all of the following three conditions", it don't think it costs anything to communicate the requirements to other SDOs to keep them informed. There's also the (IMHO remote) possibility that a new codec in another SDO gets created that fills the requirements. In any case, I do not see a reason to stall the process waiting for all other SDOs that produce codecs to respond. I don't believe the ITU-T/MPEG/3GPP work that way either. We can't just keep doing liaisons, discussing process and holding meetings. At some point it's also time to get work done. That being said, I don't think anyone involved in this effort is there just for the fun of writing codecs. If there wasn't a real need we wouldn't be here. Cheers, Jean-Marc _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf