[NUT-devel] NUT spec review - chapters

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 12:40:03AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 12:35:05AM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > > > > Iam very strogly against breaking compatibility to move from one restricted
> > > > > system which you thought sufficient in the past to a slightly differen one
> > > > > you consider sufficient now.
> > > > 
> > > > Alright. Even though there is no implementation of chapters at this
> > > > time..
> > > 
> > > hmm, well if thats true we might be able to cheat but i still think that
> > > maybe this isnt all that much of an improvment.
> > > being able to specify chapters in any timebase one wants seems sufficient.
> > > Having a timebase per timestamp seems like an overkill ...
> > 
> > That's probably okay too...
> 
> To clarify, if the decision is just to leave things as-is, I'd like to
> add a "SHOULD" recommending that NUT files use the same timebase for
> all chapters, or at least those with positive chapter_id.

Added


> 
> Also I suppose it's legal to include the gcd timebase in the global
> header's timebase list, and then chapters can truely be split at
> arbitrary points. :)

yes, but the gcd might violate "time_base_denom MUST be < 2^31"
and thus wont be storeable.

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Many things microsoft did are stupid, but not doing something just because
microsoft did it is even more stupid. If everything ms did were stupid they
would be bankrupt already.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/nut-devel/attachments/20080210/e8b707bf/attachment.pgp>