After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 750849 - dashdemux: elements added in 2014 DASH standard are not parsed
dashdemux: elements added in 2014 DASH standard are not parsed
Status: RESOLVED NOTABUG
Product: GStreamer
Classification: Platform
Component: gst-plugins-bad
git master
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: git master
Assigned To: GStreamer Maintainers
GStreamer Maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-06-12 13:34 UTC by Florin Apostol
Modified: 2017-03-12 16:48 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Description Florin Apostol 2015-06-12 13:34:29 UTC 
The 2014 DASH standard (ISO/IEC 23009-1:2014(E)) has added some new elements. It seems that the current implementation does not recognize any of these.

In chapter 5.2.3.2 "Elements and Attributes added in this Revision" the following new elements are mentioned:
  MPD@publishTime
  Period.AssetIdentifier
  Period.EventStream
  RepresentationBase.InbandEventStream
  SegmentBase@availabilityTimeOffset
  SegmentBase@availabilityTimeComplete
  BaseURL@availabilityTimeOffset
  BaseURL@availabilityTimeComplete
  Subset@id

In addition, the following attributes are not parsed:
  DescriptorType is missing id field
  RepresentationBaseType is missing EssentialProperty
  RepresentationBaseType is missing SupplementalProperty

I could not find a copy of 2012 standard (all links are replaced with links towards 2014 standard) so I don't know if these were present in 2012 version or not.
Comment 1 Thiago Sousa Santos 2015-06-15 15:10:08 UTC 
Are those fields useful? I haven't checked the new spec but it only makes sense to parse any of them if they are going to be used.
Comment 2 Florin Apostol 2015-06-15 15:23:44 UTC 
My goal was to create unit tests for each element present in the xml file. And in the process of doing that, I saw that some fields are not parsed.
At this moment I don't have any real life scenarios that would use those fields.
Comment 3 Sebastian Dröge (slomo) 2017-03-02 18:01:52 UTC 
Any plans here?
Comment 4 Thiago Sousa Santos 2017-03-12 16:48:37 UTC 
I'd rather close this as NOTABUG. Adding those xml elements just for the sake of parsing increases our codebase without any benefit from using them.

Feel free to reopen if those xml elements would be put to some use case and improve our playback. (Or perhaps, open a new bug per set of elements involved in a new use case to cover).