Timothy B. Terriberry
2010-Jun-01 02:51 UTC
[ogg-dev] Fwd: Skeleton 4.0 draft, help with Dirac fields please!
Chris Pearce wrote:> Hi Guys & Gals, > > I need you guys to decide whether we want to include extra granulepos > fields to Skeleton 4. Given the underwhelming discussion regarding this, > I'm guessing the need and/or desire for these fields isn't really there.I haven't commented mostly because I don't know what Monty's plans for a "grand unified granpos scheme" are. All of this is mostly in his head right now, and he needs to be the one to provide feedback.
Monty Montgomery
2010-Jun-01 02:56 UTC
[ogg-dev] Fwd: Skeleton 4.0 draft, help with Dirac fields please!
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry <tterribe at email.unc.edu> wrote:> Chris Pearce wrote: >> ? Hi Guys & Gals, >> >> I need you guys to decide whether we want to include extra granulepos >> fields to Skeleton 4. Given the underwhelming discussion regarding this, >> I'm guessing the need and/or desire for these fields isn't really there. > > I haven't commented mostly because I don't know what Monty's plans for a > "grand unified granpos scheme" are. All of this is mostly in his head > right now, and he needs to be the one to provide feedback.I've been trying to write it down such that it is clear or not if I understand everything I need to (especially in the case of dirac). Up to this point I haven't, thus my lack of delivery. Monty
Chris Pearce
2010-Jun-01 03:08 UTC
[ogg-dev] Fwd: Skeleton 4.0 draft, help with Dirac fields please!
On 1/06/2010 2:56 p.m., Monty Montgomery wrote:> I've been trying to write it down such that it is clear or not if I > understand everything I need to (especially in the case of dirac). Up > to this point I haven't, thus my lack of delivery. >That's cool, having it clearly written down obviously is a good thing. The delivery of OggIndex is blocked waiting on the Skeleton 4 track to be specified, so I'd greatly appreciate it if we could get these fields figured out as soon as possible. All the best, Chris P.
Silvia Pfeiffer
2010-Jun-01 03:12 UTC
[ogg-dev] Fwd: Skeleton 4.0 draft, help with Dirac fields please!
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Monty Montgomery <monty at xiph.org> wrote:> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 10:51 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry > <tterribe at email.unc.edu> wrote: >> Chris Pearce wrote: >>> ? Hi Guys & Gals, >>> >>> I need you guys to decide whether we want to include extra granulepos >>> fields to Skeleton 4. Given the underwhelming discussion regarding this, >>> I'm guessing the need and/or desire for these fields isn't really there. >> >> I haven't commented mostly because I don't know what Monty's plans for a >> "grand unified granpos scheme" are. All of this is mostly in his head >> right now, and he needs to be the one to provide feedback. > > I've been trying to write it down such that it is clear or not if I > understand everything I need to (especially in the case of dirac). ?Up > to this point I haven't, thus my lack of delivery.I don't think getting Ogg in shape for Dirac delivery is that much of a priority right now to have Firefox blocked on it. I think Chris Pearce should go ahead without these fields. There is always time for another skeleton revision to integrate this with. I would rather do this properly than rush it now. Cheers, Silvia.