[NUT-devel] [nut]: r615 - docs/nut4cc.txt

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:50:13PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 06:54:06PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > Besides that i vote for the new fourcc to be "SHIT" if we end up doing
> > > > a 4cc split :)
> > > > 
> > > > Anyway, iam slightly leaning toward just leaving all in one 4cc. Because i
> > > > just dont see any practical gain from the split, its just work, and work
> > > > for which i dont vounteer ...
> > > 
> > > Can't we just say MP4V means MPEG-4 ASP? Or are there real features in
> > > use that are outside the domain of ASP?
> > 
> > 64k will always be enough for everyone
> 
> That doesn't answer the question. Does ASP correspond directly to the
> currently implemented/used stuff, or not? If it does, I think we
> should make MP4V==ASP

What should the other profiles use?
If you cannot awnser this then the container is not a generic container.


> 
> And I really don't see people going back and implementing features of
> an old standard that were essentially deemed mistakes by the userbase.

That has no relevance to the codec id system IMO.
Also even though it is not relevant, its very well possible that some CS
students would be forced by some looser professor to implement these
other parts of mpeg4 part 2.
But again its irrelevant, if nut is a generic container there needs to be
a predictable way to identify mpeg4 (not only ASP).


> If people eventually decide to try face/mesh/etc. crap in video
> compression, they'll do it with a newer more efficient bitstream
> format, not piggybacking it onto mpeg-4 asp implementations. And if
> I'm wrong, the SHIT fourcc is still available it seems... :-)

I honestly give a shit about your predictions of what people will do ;)

It may be that you are correct but if we keep building a design based on
such predictions eventually one (or all) will turn out false.

I strongly belive we should design a system with a minimum set of
restrictions. That is never add a restriction unless there is a proofen need
adding restrictions based on hatred (even if we unanimously hate it) of
specific things does not belong in nut IMO.

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

If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
-------------- 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/20080219/5c38ef8e/attachment.pgp>