Subject: [Cellar] Last Call for #495 content reordering of section in the Matroska spec

From: Steve Lhomme <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 09:05:53 +0200

Hi,

Since my previous post may have been lost in the replies, I'm posting a 
new plain one on the mailing list to make sure everyone is aware.

I reordered a few sections of the Matroska spec so the information 
follow a more understandable flow, ie from the more general to the more 
detailed.

I did not edit any content, just moved some around.

As the changes look big and the result is not very readable as a PR, I 
uploaded the result the TXT and XML files before and after the change so 
you can compare at
https://github.com/robUx4/matroska-specification/pull/1/files

If you're OK with this, you can approve at
https://github.com/ietf-wg-cellar/matroska-specification/pull/495

Otherwise just let me know.

This is blocking other PRs as the modified text has moved. I prefer to 
do the move first as doing it later will still lead to the same problem 
and delay anything more important down the line.

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 13:17:24 -0500

Hi, Steve,

> new plain one on the mailing list to make sure everyone is aware.

Thank you for taking this question to the mailing list.

I see that Michael has already approved the PR in
https://github.com/robUx4/matroska-specification/branches, but I did have
one quick question, after a quick look through the table of contents.

       9.1.4.  Tracks Element  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
       9.1.5.  Cues Element  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

So, there's a 66-page gap between 9.1.4 and 9.1.5. The specification has
plenty of 9.1.4.n subsections, but they don't show up in the TOC, because
the "tocDepth" attribute isn't specified in the XML, and defaults to "3",
so they won't be easily spotted unless you know what to search for in the
text.

Perhaps you could consider adding "tocDepth=4" to

<rfc version="3" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-ietf-cellar-matroska-08"
sortRefs="true" submissionType="IETF" category="info" xml:lang="en"
xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" consensus="true">

?

While cross-checking the XML, I noticed that

<title abbrev="Matroska Format">Matroska Media Container Format
Specifications</title><seriesInfo value="draft-ietf-cellar-matroska-08"
stream="IETF" status="informational" name="Internet-Draft"></seriesInfo>

says that the specification is "informational", but the CELLAR charter at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/cellar/about/ says that the Matroska
specifications would be Standards Track, so status="std".

Best,

Spencer

> _______________________________________________
> Cellar mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar
>