On 01/02/2020 22:02, rcombs wrote:
>> Because the spec defines what is de facto - it is what defines what AC-3
>> *is*.
>> You are choosing to ignore it here because you don't like what's in it.
>
> This is "de jure"; "de facto" means how it's actually implemented in practice.
Woops, yes, you ar
> On Feb 1, 2020, at 15:55, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
>
>>> and the defacto way to handle decoding AC-3.
>>
>> Is it, though? My understanding is that AV receivers usually only enable AC3
>> DRC in "night mode" or the like, and few even provide a fully-tunable
>> setting for it. Apple's decode
On 01/02/2020 21:03, rcombs wrote:
>
>> If "I don't agree with the spec" or "this spec does something stupid" were
>> valid
>> arguments, we may as well not have specs at all, and FFmpeg would have a lot
>> more
>> garbage in it. You can write at length why you think it's bad, but that does
>>
> On Feb 1, 2020, at 13:43, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
>
> On 01/02/2020 19:34, rcombs wrote:
>> This issue has been argued before, with the status quo being preserved under
>> the logic that the spec says this parameter is supposed to default to 1,
>> and that we should follow the spec. The spec
On 2/1/20, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 01/02/2020 20:37, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> I was not vague, your reasoning that because of dolby we need to comply to
>> some
>> standards is not good.
>> Even dolby does not follow this as already mentioned on this same thread.
>
> So write this in the email
On 01/02/2020 20:37, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> I was not vague, your reasoning that because of dolby we need to comply to
> some
> standards is not good.
> Even dolby does not follow this as already mentioned on this same thread.
So write this in the email instead of one completely devoid of any reas
On 2/1/20, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 01/02/2020 20:18, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> This does not have much logic or valid reasoning.
>
> Please stop your constant vague troll replies and ad hominem attacks.
I was not vague, your reasoning that because of dolby we need to comply to some
standards is
On 01/02/2020 20:18, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> This does not have much logic or valid reasoning.
Please stop your constant vague troll replies and ad hominem attacks.
They are rampant on this mailing list; practically every thread, but
specifically against some people. It's getting ridiculous. It mak
On 2/1/20, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 01/02/2020 19:34, rcombs wrote:
>> This issue has been argued before, with the status quo being preserved
>> under
>> the logic that the spec says this parameter is supposed to default to 1,
>> and that we should follow the spec. The spec was misguided, and
On 01/02/2020 19:34, rcombs wrote:
> This issue has been argued before, with the status quo being preserved under
> the logic that the spec says this parameter is supposed to default to 1,
> and that we should follow the spec. The spec was misguided, and thus so was
> blindly following it.
If "I d
On 2/1/2020 4:34 PM, rcombs wrote:
> This issue has been argued before, with the status quo being preserved under
> the logic that the spec says this parameter is supposed to default to 1,
> and that we should follow the spec. The spec was misguided, and thus so was
> blindly following it.
>
> The
On 1/29/20, rcombs wrote:
> This issue has been argued before, with the status quo being preserved under
> the logic that the spec says this parameter is supposed to default to 1,
> and that we should follow the spec. The spec was misguided, and thus so was
> blindly following it.
>
> The (E-)AC3
12 matches
Mail list logo
