H.248 Implementors' Guide Additions v2
Christian.Groves at ERICSSON.COM
Fri Feb 16 01:45:24 EST 2001
At 05:32 PM 2/14/2001 +0100, Baese Gero wrote:
>If there is no official software available for H.263 containing
>all annexes needed for the tests, as Stephan Wenger pointed out, we can
>only restrict ourselves to H.26L. Otherwise we are not comparing our
>methods but rather special implementations of a video coding standard.
I don't believe it be wise to resort on H.26L, for at least three reasons:
1. H.26L is in a relatively early stage of standardization, and especially
the network adaptation layers are bound to change significantly. While
there is a controlled software available, this software is going to change
often at least for another year. Not a good start if you want to have
2. Due to its computational complexity and due to the timing of
standardization and development of H.26L, it will likely take
several years before the first H.26L products will be available. Hence
there is little point to rush out an Annex I that is optimized
(explicitly or implicitly) for H.26L. And, once it is out, it will
probably not see deployment in the mobile field at first, again
due to its computational complexity.
3. An argument of fairness: Thomas Stockhammer, one of the key
contributors of the error resilience / NAL work in H.26L, is somewhat
attached to the Siemens/HHI/TU Muenchen group. Not exactly fair,
considering that, as far as I know, UCLA and Samsung are not
directly involved in the H.26L standardization process. H.263++,
in contrast, is a ratified standard and thus gives anyone a chance
to implement it the best way he/she can.
I don't really know why I bother to write this EMail at all; you know
my position on Annex I in general... I guess, point #3 and a personal
inclination to fairness is my main reason.
For help on this mail list, send "HELP ITU-SG16" in a message to
listserv at mailbag.intel.com
More information about the sg16-avd