[matroska-general] Re: H.264 updates

Steve Lhomme 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.
>>http://www.matroska.org
>>
> 
> 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.

> Christian
> 
> 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 :
> 
> http://news.gmane.org/thread.php?group=gmane.comp.multimedia.matroska.general
> http://news.gmane.org/thread.php?group=gmane.comp.multimedia.matroska.devel

http://www.matroska.org




More information about the Matroska-general mailing list