- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 10:33:02 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Den 11. juli 2018 10:12, skrev Sergio Garcia Murillo: > On 09/07/2018 13:51, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 07/04/2018 01:59 AM, Bernard Aboba wrote: >>> >>> [BA] If the desire is to make things as simple as possible, could we >>> do something like this? >>> >>> >>> var encodings = [ >>> { >>> rid: "L0", >>> temporalLayers: 2, >>> >>> spatialLayers: 3 >>> >>> } >>> >>> >> I think this would be unwise. >> >> There are 2 parameters - temporal scaling and spatial scaling. Calling >> a layer "temporal" or "spatial" implies that only one of these >> parameters varies from its base layer; it should (I think) be quite >> common to vary both. >> > I am not sure if I understand your concern, could you elaborate it a bit > more please? As I understand the proposal, the encoding attributes > defines the number of temporal and spatial layers that it will contain > (same as it is done now with the chrome field trial to enable SVC for > VP9). In this case this will create a layer structure withing the the > encoding that would be sl0tl0, sl0tl1, sl0tl2, sl1tl0, sl1tl1, sl1tl2, > sl2tl0, sl2tl1, sl2tl2, and the encoding parameters for each layer > (downscale, bitrate, etc) would be decided by the browser based on the > encoding attributes. If I want to send an SVC stream that has a 320x240 base layer at 10 fps and an enhancement layer of 640x480 at 60 fps, and no other layers, is this temporal or spatial scaling? > > Best regards > Sergio
Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2018 08:33:39 UTC