- From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 09:31:24 +0200
- To: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>, "public-ortc@w3.org" <public-ortc@w3.org>
On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com> wrote: > > > On May 5, 2014, at 5:38 PM, "Robin Raymond" <robin@hookflash.com> wrote: > > We've been throwing around some use case concepts for a while but it would > be good to have a bit more of a firm list of the scenarios we want to be > able to support out of the gate. > > > > > [BA] For me, the list of required simulcast/SVC use cases is pretty simple: > > 1. Temporal scalability. This one is basic because it is the most popular > mode of H.264/SVC, and it is built in to VP8/9 and HEVC. > > 2. Spatial simulcast with temporal scalability. This combination of modes is > supported in the Open H.264 encoder as well as quite a few commercial > products. > > That's it. From my perspective all other combinations of > temporal/spatial/quality and simulcast are optional. That isn't to say they > aren't cool, just that you can get a lot of mileage out of these two without > too much complexity (or encoding horsepower). I agree that these two are most important with a slight edge for temporal scalability given that simulcast can be handled through GUM. Emil -- https://jitsi.org
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2014 07:32:12 UTC