Subject: [codec] WGLC of draft-ietf-codec-ambisonics-05

From: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2018 13:02:40 -0700

The latest draft appears to resolve all open issues. The chairs would 
like to initiate a working group last call on 
draft-ietf-codec-ambisonics-05 to help gather any remaining issues.

The draft can be found at 
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-codec-ambisonics-05

This will be a two-week WGLC. Please send comments to the list by the 
end of the day on May 15th.

---

From: Jean-Marc Valin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2018 14:15:23 -0400

I'm happy with the latest version of the document. Ship it!

Cheers,

	Jean-Marc

On 05/01/2018 04:02 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> codec mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec

---

From: "Jean-Baptiste Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 14:43:14 +0200

Hello,

> end of the day on May 15th.

The last draft looks good to me.

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Kempf -  President
+33 672 704 734

---

From: Mark Harris <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 21:14:24 -0700

> The latest draft appears to resolve all open issues. The chairs would like
> to initiate a working group last call on draft-ietf-codec-ambisonics-05 to
> help gather any remaining issues.
>
> This will be a two-week WGLC. Please send comments to the list by the end of
> the day on May 15th.

I re-read this document for the WGLC and it looks pretty good.

There is one sentence in section 3.1 where it appears that a minor
grammatical error was introduced in an earlier revision:

   "Note that channel mapping family 2 allows for so-called mixed order
   ambisonic representation where only a subset of the full ambisonic
   order number of channels."

I believe that adding the words "are encoded" before the final "."
would allow this sentence to be interpreted as intended.

Otherwise this document looks good to me.

 - Mark