Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #1182, comment 5


Ignore:
Timestamp:
16 Jul 2020, 18:59:28 (4 years ago)
Author:
hanhuang
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #1182, comment 5

    initial v1  
    1 Note that in "8.5.5.8   Derivation process for constructed affine control point motion vector prediction candidates", The third (bottom-left) control point motion vector cpMvLX[ 2 ] is derived regardless the numCpMv.  So cpMvpLx[ 2 ] is defined. The output described in 8.5.5.8 is: "the constructed affine control point motion vector prediction candidiates cpMvLX[ cpIdx ] with cpIdx = 0..'''2''' and X being 0 or 1."   The issue is in step 6 of 8.5.5.7, it's described as "and cpMvpLX[ cpIdx ] with cpIdx = 0..'''numCpMv − 1''' as outputs"
     1Note that in "8.5.5.8   Derivation process for constructed affine control point motion vector prediction candidates", The third (bottom-left) control point motion vector cpMvLX[ 2 ] is derived regardless the numCpMv.  So cpMvpLx[ 2 ] is defined. The output described in 8.5.5.8 is: "the constructed affine control point motion vector prediction candidiates cpMvLX[ cpIdx ] with cpIdx = 0..'''2''' and X being 0 or 1."   The issue is in step 6 of 8.5.5.7, it's described as "and cpMvpLX[ cpIdx ] with cpIdx = 0..'''numCpMv − 1''' as outputs" I think it should be typo here.
    22
    33Huanban is correct that it doesn't make spec broken even cpMvpLX[2] is undefined value.