Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More deprecated elements #39

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 31, 2016
Merged

More deprecated elements #39

merged 2 commits into from
Jul 31, 2016

Conversation

mbunkus
Copy link
Contributor

@mbunkus mbunkus commented Jul 30, 2016

This pull request adds minver and maxver attributes to those elements that are currently shown gray-on-gray on the old specs page. The intention of those was to have them deprecated as well, but we never added the version attributes to the corresponding XML file.

As I couldn't figure out when we decided not to use those elements after all I decoded to use 3 as the maximum version.

See also this comment by @robUx4.

@robUx4
Copy link
Contributor

robUx4 commented Jul 31, 2016

In the "original" specs all those elements are marked as belonging to no version so I think it's fair to put maxver to 0 for all of them.

This commit brings this specification in line with the old one on
www.matroska.org. The elements shown as dark gray text on light gray
background where all meant to be deprecated. Unfortunately the XML file
in the matroska-foundation repository did not reflect this fact.

As I couldn't find out when exactly each of those elements had been
deprecated I chose to use version 3 as the maximum version.
@mbunkus
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbunkus commented Jul 31, 2016

Hmm good point. I've changed the commit to use minver="0" maxver="0" and force-pushed.

@robUx4 robUx4 merged commit 9c03fcd into ietf-wg-cellar:gh-pages Jul 31, 2016
@dericed
Copy link
Contributor

dericed commented Aug 2, 2016

Perhaps we need to explain somewhere that in the context of Matroska there is no version zero, but that version=0 is an alias for invalid or experimental.

@dericed
Copy link
Contributor

dericed commented Aug 7, 2017

Reading this late, but am a bit concerned before this patch these elements were valid in many versions of Matroska but after the patch many files in the world are suddenly invalid.

@mbunkus
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbunkus commented Aug 7, 2017

Can you quantify that? How many files do you have that contain one of those elements? Or is that more of a gut feeling?

@robUx4
Copy link
Contributor

robUx4 commented Aug 19, 2017

Actually the DivX elements exist in the wild. But that's a different question, should be keep track of what exists in other specs ? Like WebM and DivX. IMO we should make it easy for them to define what they support (like extra elements they can add to the XML) but it should not more.
In the case of WebM mkvalidator already differentiate the checks done for WebM and Matroska. But not DivX IIRC. There's also no way to know if a file is DivX or not.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants