Subject: [clue] Framework WGLC

From: "Roni Even" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 17:20:48 +0200

Hi,

The WGLC is almost ending and there are no comments on the list.

Please review and respond even if it is just to say that you have read the
document and have no comments.

Thanks

Roni Even

CLUE co-chair

---

From: Robert Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:59:20 +0000

Find my review attached.

Most of the time the document capitalises terms from the terminology, 
but not always; at first I flagged these up whenever I noticed them but 
I'm sure I missed some and by the end I realised that going through with 
grep and 'find next' was going to be much quicker than correcting based 
on my review anyway so I stopped.

Almost all of the issues are just nits with the language or requests for 
clarifications; I'll repeat the two that I thought were contentious:

Section 7.2. page 22:
"A MCC MAY contain no references to other Captures to indicate that the 
MCC contains content from multiple sources but no information regarding 
those sources is given." - We don't specify if an MCC containing 1 or 
more defined captures may also contain undefined captures. My personal 
choice would be no - advertised MCCs either contain the defined captures 
and no others, or have no defined captures and contain only undefined 
ones. If there are good reasons that any MCC with defined captures also 
needs to contain potentially undefined ones that's fine too but we 
should spell it out.

Section 10. page 39:
"The Consumer may or may not choose to receive all the indicated 
captures.  Therefore it can choose to receive a sub-set ofCaptures 
indicated by the MCC." - this allowance means that any device that 
provides an MCC and defines the captures it contains is required to 
allow any subset of those captures to be chosen bv the consumer. Often 
the reason the provider is providing an MCC initially is because it 
cannot supply all the captures directly; unless it has the resources to 
provide a unique subset of each capture (eg, switched view or custom 
composition) it will be forced to ot include the contained captures in 
the MCC, removing the value of having an MCC in the first place. 
Depending on the clarification to the question on page 22 (whether an 
MCC with defined captures can also contain undefined captures) the 
consumer may still be receiving captures it hasn't specified. My 
preference would be to remove this degree of freedom on the consumer 
side, or at least make it a suggestion to the provider rather than a 
mandatory restriction. There should also be a space in "ofCaptures".

Rob

---

From: "Duckworth, Mark" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 13:57:00 -0800

Hi Rob,
I implemented most of your suggestions, and started new email threads for a couple of them.

You had one comment about being more clear the consumer can pick and choose captures regardless of CSVs.  I didn't change anything because section 7.3 Capture Scene already says "it can pick and choose Media Captures regardless of how the Provider arranges them in Capture Scene Views."

I left the multiple encodings in the encoding group example because there are still multiple captures that refer to the same encoding group, so it is still possible to use more than one encoding from a group.

Mark

> -----Original Message-----
> From: clue [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Robert Hansen
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 5:59 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [clue] Framework WGLC
> 
> Find my review attached.
>