[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] MPEG-TS demuxer: Report 4cc in codec_tag field instead of SMTPE RID
Tue Sep 1 22:38:56 CEST 2009
On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 09:10:57AM +0200, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 06:02:09PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> > On 08/31/2009 05:48 PM, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> > > Sorry, but you're wrong. There is nowhere a requirement that the
> > > format_identifier value correspond one-to-one with anything.
> > I think the specs are pretty clear:
> > "The registration descriptor of ITU-T Rec. H.222.0 | ISO/IEC 13818-1 is
> > provided by this text in order to enable users of this Specification to
> > unambiguously carry data when its format is not recognized by this
> > Specification. This provision will permit this Specification to carry
> > all types of data while providing for a method of unambiguous
> > identification of the characteristics of the underlying private data."
> > I maintain that using the same registration descriptor for different
> > private data is against the specifications, since it goes against
> > providing unambiguous identification of the underlying private data.
> I think M?ns meant to say that "private data" != "codec", and the
> AC3+TrueHD combination mess with other data to differentiate them can
> all together be considered the "private data" format.
> Though I'd say that definitely is a case of going with the letter of the
> spec instead of with the spirit...
i think so as well, though i would word it closer to how baptiste did
But above all, i think its clear that the spec is ambigous as we apparently
interpret it differently from each other.
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel