Add Appendix A on sato examples #253
Conversation
|
I don't love how appendices are rendered in Bikeshed, but there doesn't really seem to be any alternative. I've filed this issue to see if it's possible to get support for lettered annexes: speced/bikeshed#2929 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I played around with various ways of trying to get a Letter.Number Annex tree, but it does not seem to be supported. I think this is the best we can do for now until Bikeshed implements something like speced/bikeshed#2929
y-guyon
force-pushed
the
sato_examples
branch
from
ea98221
to
a97eb9f
Compare
|
Rebased. |
| @@ -697,12 +698,12 @@ The '<dfn for="AVIF">ster</dfn>' entity group as defined in [[!HEIF]] may be use | |||
| The brand to identify [=AV1 image items=] is <dfn export for="AVIF Image brand">avif</dfn>. | |||
|
|
|||
| Files that indicate this brand in the <code>[=compatible_brands=]</code> field of the <code>[=FileTypeBox=]</code> shall comply with the following: | |||
| - <assert>The primary item shall be an [=AV1 Image Item=] or be a derived image that references directly or indirectly one or more items that all are [=AV1 Image Items=].</assert> | |||
| - <assert>The [=primary image item=] shall be an [=AV1 Image Item=] or be a derived image that references directly or indirectly one or more items that all are [=AV1 Image Items=].</assert> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The term "primary item" is correct. It comes from the PrimaryItemBox ('pitm'). It is used in ISOBMFF, HEIF, and MIAF.
The term "primary image item" is used in HEIF and MIAF and occurs only four and five times respectively (much less frequent than "primary item").
It seems that these standards use these two terms interchangeably.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to reference it with [= =]. Do you prefer:
- To keep as is
- To revert to
primary item - To use
[=primary item=]and addprimary itemto the ISOBMFFdfn
index.bs
Outdated
| Consider the following: | ||
| - A [=MIAF image item=] being a lossily coded image item,<br>and its <code>'[=pixi=]'</code> property with <code>[=bits_per_channel=]</code>=12, | ||
| - Another [=MIAF image item=] being a lossily or losslessly coded image item with the same dimensions and number of samples as the first input image item,<br>and its <code>'[=pixi=]'</code> property with <code>[=bits_per_channel=]</code>=8,<br>with the following contraints: | ||
| - For each sample position in each plane,<br><math><msub><mi>sample</mi><mi>original</mi></msub></math> being the value of the 16-bit original sample at that position in that plane,<br><math><msub><mi>sample</mi><mi>1</mi></msub></math> being the value of the 12-bit sample of the first input image at that position in that plane,<br><math><msub><mi>sample</mi><mi>2</mi></msub></math> being the value of the sample of the second input image at that position in that plane,<br><math><mo>≈</mo></math> representing similarity within compression loss range, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: In this sentence, I think "being" can all be changed to "is", and "representing" can be changed to "represents".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is not really a sentence, it is the premise of each of the five following constraints. Do you still think your comment applies?
Do you think repeating that premise at the beginning of each constraint instead of once before all would be better?
SHA: fa78f2b Reason: push, by y-guyon Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
SHA: fa78f2b Reason: push, by y-guyon Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Fixes #252
Preview | Diff