Adding max Group/Ojbect SAP types #7
Conversation
wilaw
left a comment
wilaw
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested new names and definitions to clarify what is being communicated.
| #### Maximum SAP type of a Group (#maxgrpsaptype) | ||
| Location: T Required: Optional JSON Type: Number | ||
|
|
||
| A number indicating the maximum SAP type the MOQT Groups in the track start with. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this really mean the SAP type of the first Object within any Group? Because Group is just a virtual collection of Objects. So how can #maxgrpsaptype and #maxobjsaptype differ, since a Group is just comprised of OBjects.
Suggest we rename:
Max Group SAP starting type: the Maximum SAP type of the first Object in a Group
Max Group SAP non-starting type: Maximum SAP type contained in second and subsequent Objects within a Group.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Example: A group starting with non-reordering IDR (SAP type 1), i.e., the first picture in Object 0 (note that an Object can contain multiple coded pictures) is a non-reordering IDR picture, and the Group contains some non-first Objects starting with CRA (SAP type 3), i.e., the first picture in each of these non-first Objects is a CRA picture. Herein #maxgrpsaptype = 1, and #maxobjsaptype = 3.
Changing the name of #maxgrpsaptype to Max Group SAP starting type is editorial and it is good to me.
Changing the name of #maxobjsaptype to Max Group SAP non-starting type is technical. Please note that this would make it technically different from @subsegmentStartsWithSAP in DASH. To me that is not as good as keeping the alignment. I prefer to have the alignment, but if you have a strong opinion to change it noting that the alignment is lost, that is OK to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, I agree on changing name to "Max Group SAP starting type". Can you make that editorial change?
On the second point, I didn't appreciate that it would break compatibility with @subsegmentStartsWithSAP in DASH, so I agree with your suggestion to keep the name the same.
2 participants
Fixes: #4