[NUT-devel] [nut]: r613 - docs/nutissues.txt

[Alban Bedel]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:00:10 +0100 (CET)
michael <subversion at mplayerhq.hu> wrote:

> Modified: docs/nutissues.txt
> ==============================================================================
> --- docs/nutissues.txt	(original)
> +++ docs/nutissues.txt	Tue Feb 12 16:00:09 2008
> @@ -162,3 +162,8 @@ How do we identify the interleaving
>  A. fourcc
>  B. extradata

I would vote for this with a single fourcc for pcm and a single fourcc
for raw video. Having infos about the data format packed in the fourcc
is ugly and useless. That just lead to inflexible lookup tables and the
like. Instead we should just define the format in a way similar to what
mp_image provide for video (colorspace, packed or not, shift used for
the subsampled planes, etc). That would allow implementations simply
supporting all definable format, instead of a selection of what happened
to be commonly used formats at the time the implementation was written.

>  C. New field in the stream header
> +D. Only allow 1 standard interleaving
> +
> +What about the interleaving of non raw codecs, do all specify the
> +interleaving, or does any leave it to the container? If so, our
> options +would be down to only C.

On a related subject, it might also be useful to define the channel
disposition when there is more than one. Mono and stereo can go by with
the classical default, but as soon as there is more channels it is
really unclear. And imho such info could still be usefull with 1 or 2
channels. Something like the position of each channel in polar
coordinate (2D or 3D?) should be enouth.

	Albeu