Hi Jonathan, Thanks very much for the review.
On 18/11/16 02:15 AM, Jonathan Lennox wrote:
> 1. I assume none of these changes rise to the level that they would
> make any change to the textual description of the Opus codec? This
> should probably be stated explicitly.
I believe that's correct, but I'll check.
> 2. The abstract and introduction should mention that this document
> updates the normative behavior of the codec, including the test
> vectors.
Agreed. I'll make the change in the next version.
> 3. The link to the properly-formatted patch matching the document
> should be mentioned somewhere other than in Section 5 — especially
> since it actually includes patches for all the sections of the
> document, not just Section 5 and above. The introduction seems like
> a sensible place, perhaps.
Agreed, will update. There's also going to be the question of where that
patch should go. Since it's a lot smaller than the test vectors, there
may be more options.
Cheers,
Jean-Marc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ codec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec
