I'm fine with the proposed text in general. I only have two comments below:
On 08/21/2013 09:00 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:
> When possible, creating the TOC byte using the same
> mode, audio bandwidth, channel count, and frame size as the previous
> packet (if any) covers all losses that do not include a configuration
> switch, as defined in Section 4.5 of [RFC6716].
Any way you can make that sentence easier to parse?
> If
> there is no previous packet, reasonable decoders will not emit
> anything other than silence regardless of the mode. Using the CELT-
> only mode for this case (with any audio bandwidth) allows maximum
> flexibility, since a single packet can represent any duration up to
> 120 ms that is a multiple of 2.5 ms using at most two bytes.
I think both these sentences should go since they add more confusion
than they help.
Jean-Marc
_______________________________________________
codec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
