[matroska-general] Re: H.264 updates
steve.lhomme at free.fr
Thu Mar 13 19:51:44 CET 2003
Christian HJ Wiesner wrote:
> To: matroska-general at freelists.org
> CC: hdot264-devel at lists.sf.net
> Steve Lhomme wrote:
>>OK, that makes 5 bits (0x00 to 0x1F). That leaves 1 free/unused/reserved in the
>>Block. And we handle all cases covered by H.264 (the most complex big codec of
>>the coming years) in a cleaner way, even the cases not covered by their specs.
> I am backing up the idea to use 5 of the spare 6 bits we have to be able
> to support h.264 in a neat way .... after all, if i am not mistaken we
> could ( in principal ) redefine the use of those 6 bits for other
> codecs, if really necessary ? Sure, its not the best way to go to make
> such specific definitions for every codec, but h.264 will be used for
> the next 4 - 6 years i guess, and then we have to think about matroska 2
> already ;) ....
Yes, actually if there ever need to be a non-backward-compatible
matroska 2 it will be because of the Block element. For sure having only
1 bit left for expansion is a bit limited :(
Also 0x0B to 0x1F is reserved. So if we need 1 more bit before H.264, we
have another option/bit.
> BTW : why was this thread started in matroska-general instead of
> matroska-devel ?
That was my idea. As it's more a general discussion. But well, there is
no written rule.
> Full threads :
More information about the Matroska-general