id,summary,reporter,owner,description,type,status,priority,milestone,component,version,resolution,keywords,cc 623,Typos and undefined variables in ACT related text,vdrugeon,,"1. Typo in semantics of sps_act_enabled_flag: ""sps_act_enabled_flag specifies ''that'' whether adaptive colour transform is enabled. "" 2. Typo in semantics of cu_act_enabled_flag: ""cu_act_enabled_flag ''is'' equal to 0 specifies that the residuals of the current coding unit are coded in original colour space"" 3. In 8.4.5.1 General decoding process for intra blocks, the last step (step 4) in the process uses the variable resSample as input: ""the picture reconstruction process for a colour component as specified in clause 8.7.5 is invoked with the transform block location ( xTbComp, yTbComp ) set equal to ( xTb0 + nW * xPartIdx, yTb0 + nH * yPartIdx ), the transform block width nTbW, the transform block height nTbH set equal to nW and nH, the variable cIdx, the (nW)x(nH) array predSamples[ x ][ y ] with x = xPartPbIdx * nW..( xPartPbIdx +1 ) * nW − 1, y = 0..nH − 1, and the (nW)x(nH) array ''resSamples'' as inputs,"". However, when controlPara is equal to 2, resSamples is not derived in this process anymore, so that this variable is undefined when it is used. At first sight, it seems that resSamples should be one of the inputs of this process when controlPara is equal to 2. However, I think that it would probably be editorially cleaner to remove the picture reconstruction process step for this process and apply it one level higher in the specification (i.e. in 8.4.1 General decoding process for coding units coded in intra prediction mode). It would remove the need to have a process that has inputs and outputs that depends on the value of cu_act_enabled_flag. ",defect,closed,blocker,VVC D10,spec,VVC D9 vB,fixed,,ksuehring bbross XiangLi fbossen jvet@…