Issues in HRD related text

[vdrugeon]

1. There seems to be an issue in the syntax of the picture timing SEI message, whereby pt_cpb_removal_delay_minus1 should be signalled when pt_cpb_removal_delay_delta_enabled_flag[ i ] is 0, but it is currently signalled when bp_num_cpb_removal_delay_deltas_minus1 is 0. Opening and closing brackets for the condition "if( pt_cpb_removal_delay_delta_enabled_flag[ i ] )" are missing, and the indentation of "else pt_cpb_removal_delay_minus1[ i ]" is wrong.

2. There is still an issue in the equation for the calculation of AuDpbOutputDelta: if CpbRemovalDelayVal[ i ] and pt_cpb_removal_delay_minus1[ bp_max_sublayers_minus1 ] differ by CpbRemovalDelayMsb[ i ], then AuDpbOutputDelta will be too big. "pt_cpb_removal_delay_minus1[ bp_max_sublayers_minus1 ] + 1" should probably be replaced by "CpbRemovalDelayVal[ bp_max_sublayers_minus1 ]" instead. Please check!

3. In C.4 Bitstream conformance condition 6, there are still two instances of CpbRemovalTime: "…that have PictureOutputFlag equal to 1 and CpbRemovalTime[ n ] less than CpbRemovalTime[ currPic ]…" I guess that it should probably be AuCpbRemovalTime here, but please check.

[sachind]

Regarding 1: Indentation of "else pt_cpb_removal_delay_minus1[ i ]" should be decreased one level to be at the same level as "if( pt_cpb_removal_delay_delta_enabled_flag[ i ] )"

[ysanchez]

Regarding 2: I thought that was solved. The proposed solution makes sense. Eq. D3 needs to be updated as suggested, i.e.:

AuDpbOutputDelta[ i ] = CpbRemovalDelayVal[ i ] − CpbRemovalDelayVal[ bp_max_sublayers_minus1 ] − ( i = = bp_max_sublayers_minus1 ? 0 : bp_dpb_output_tid_offset[ i ] )

[yk]

Thanks! Items 1 and 2 will be fixed in JVET-S2001-v6. Item 3 has already been fixed in an earlier version of JVET-S2001.