Re: [MMUSIC] rfc5888: Multigroup management

[Santiago Carot Nemesio <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

thanks a lot for your reply, see comments below.

2016-06-20 15:39 GMT+02:00 Bo Burman <[e-mail]>:
> Hi,
>
> I think this list should be capable to answer your question.
>
> It seems to me that you in general need to consider the semantics of the grouping. Looking to your example below, I don't really understand what you try to express with
> a=group:LS 1 2 3
> a=group:LS 1 2
> Obviously, if media lines with mid 1, 2, and 3 are lip-synchronized (LS), so are mid 1 and 2, since it is a true subset of the first group. The second "a=" line is redundant even to start with. As such, just removing or disregarding the resulting repeated line in the answer in your example does not cause any concern or ambiguity.

This is not a real case at all, I just wanted to raise awareness about
this concern, so that's just a simple example of ambiguity in case any
peer needs to distinguis this case, So the semantic regarding of the
grouping of medias is application dependant you can not make
assumptions about what application do or even what they are trying to
do, but from the implementation point of view perhaps you need to
distinguish what group was offered with what medias and what medias
were accepted for any specific group.

So I suspects that just as it is right now this is not possible.
Please, fixme if I'm wrong or I'm missing something.

Thanks