Re: lossless audio codec for video capturing

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 09:32:14 +1100, Martin Heffels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:41:15 +0100, Peter Larsen
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Martin Heffels wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, one refers to bit-reduction as in what programs like WinZIP etc
>>> do: if I got ten zeros in a row, I don't write ten zeros, but say that
>>> there are ten zeros at this place. This leads to no reduction in
>>> quality.
>>
>>And there is no bit reduction, all the bits are there, they are just
>>written differently.
>
>Of course there is bit-reduction. You end of with a file with less
>bits then the original :)
>That's what makes the term bit-reduction so confusing. Maybe we
>should set-up a IEEE-committee to set a standard for the naming?

I can't tell if this was a serious suggestion or not, but it seems to me that
it probably should be.  Currently, it takes at least 3 words to unambiguously
say what variant of compression you mean, and given the human tendency to
abbreviate, all those words will not be in the average statement made from one
engineer to another.  It would be good to have some unambiguous, single-word
terms.