Re: Re: Encoder-decoder interface question.

Hi!

> Erm, just a quick note so that we don't forget. The
> Tarkin codec in 
> its current state is mainly meant as an experiment
> with 3D wavelet 
> coding, not as a workable codec. Especially with
> Theora on the way, 
> Tarkin is mainly a research project aimed at finding
> new algorithms 
> or even totally new paradigms for the next
> generation of codecs.

I have a small question: 3D wavelets are out of the
question, don't they? I thought that we pursue 2D
wavelet transform and a motion compensation scheme for
now. Am I wrong here? But if 3D wavelets remains then
the interface must be able to easily pass trought
multiple frames. I don't know if other codecs are
doing this right now...

As long as the "frame-in -> stream out" methodology
remains, the interface should stay the same even if
those internal algorithms will improve.

> 
> That said, ofcourse you are free to do whatever you
> like with it, 
> and I think UCI could be the solution to a problem
> that's been 
> mentioned here before, namely whether we want to
> have a standard 
> platform for codec development, something that lets
> you test your 
> codec in an easy way. UCI could do that, since all
> you'd have to do 
> is write a UCI interface and you can test out your
> codec with your 
> favourite video editor (if it supports UCI
> ofcourse).
> 

That was my desire too, to simplify the testing, and
while I put an interface on it I get to know better
the internal parts (even if those will change).

> Lourens

Thanks for you info.
  Attila

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com
--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to '[email protected]'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.