On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 11:14:40AM -0500, Rich Felker
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:22:31PM +0100, Michael
Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 12:18:09PM +0100, Michael
Niedermayer wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > attached patch would change nut.txt to the
alternative keyframe definition
> >
> > i will apply this in a few days if there are no
objections
>
> I'm not opposed to any of this in principle, but I
think the wording
> could be clearer (more formal, less discussion of
rationale which
> belongs in a separate section imo).
Iam not in favor of (re)moving explanations and discussions.
Its more
understandable if explanations are close to where they are
needed.
This reminds me of the h.264 spec where early versions where
quite
understandable. And which then where changed to be exact and
precisse
with no explanations to the point that it was not
understandable anymore.
anyway a seperate much bigger explanations and rationale
section is of
course very important anyway. But IMO removing explanations
from all
other sections is not a good idea.
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint:
9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Why not whip the teacher when the pupil misbehaves? --
Diogenes of Sinope
_______________________________________________
NUT-devel mailing list
NUT-devel mplayerhq.hu
http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/nut-devel
|
