Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implicit tiling clarifications #771

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 20, 2024

Conversation

javagl
Copy link
Contributor

@javagl javagl commented May 18, 2024

Fixes #766

The implementation notes used contentAvailability.bufferView where it should have been contentAvailability.bitstream. I think we went back and forth with the naming of bufferView and bitstream while writing this, and "bitstream" and "buffer view" are sometimes used interchangeably. I tried to adjust the wording to reduce the potential for confusion: The contentAvailability.bitstream is the index of a buffer view (and this buffer view is/contains a bitstream).

Fixes #769

The main change here is that the word "content" is now differentiated more clearly to be "content" or "contents" when listing the cases. The issue originally only referred to the contentAvailability. But a similar (and similarly confusing) wording was used for the contentMetadata, so this is fixed here as well.

@lilleyse lilleyse merged commit 87218a7 into main May 20, 2024
@lilleyse lilleyse deleted the implicit-tiling-clarifications-2024-05-18 branch May 20, 2024 14:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants