Subject: [clue] How to choose from multiple scenes

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 18:06:43 -0500

* The problem:

As we discussed in the interim today, it seems unclear what a consumer 
should do when receiving an advertisement with multiple scenes in order 
to get a sufficient representation of the advertised content.

Our simple cases have been where there is one scene for the cameras in 
the room, and another scene for a presentation. In that case, one should 
take something from each scene (typically one CSE from each) to get 
"enough".

That is also true if an MCU acted in "pass through" mode and simply 
included "copies" of all the scenes it receives in advertisements, with 
encodings for them all.

In a "simple" case with an MCU use MCC, it might "pass through" all the 
advertisements it receives, for their spatial info, but not provide any 
encodings for them. Rather, it would provide one or more new scenes 
using MCC to aggregate those sources. Then one would not want to 
configure from the "pass through" scenes, but that isn't an option 
anyway if there are no encodings for them.

Mark has proposed using multiple scenes with MCC to illustrate switched 
cases where some groupings don't have any spatial relationship to one 
another. Some of those examples end up with multiple scenes that do have 
encodings, where it doesn't make sense to configure something from each 
scene.

Today we discussed using priority to solve this, but this isn't really a 
priority problem, it is a problem of *alternatives* that may be equally 
desirable, depending on the resources or desires of the consumer.

IMO the problem is that our CSE mechanism is a way for the advertiser to 
suggest alternatives, but this only works on a per-scene basis. The 
advertiser has no comparable mechanism to suggest alternatives from 
different scenes.

* My proposed solution:

I want to restate a proposal I made a long time ago:

Instead of one CSE list per scene, have one CSE list per-advertisement, 
referencing captures from any scene.

This makes it possible for the advertiser to recommend combinations that 
cross scene boundaries.

* An alternate solution:

Another possibility would be to leave CSEs as they are, but add 
something analogous to a CSE list, but that lists recommended 
combinations of scenes.

	Thanks,
	Paul

---

From: Christian Groves <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:33:26 +1100

Hello Paul,

Please see below.

Regards, Christian

On 28/01/2014 10:06 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote:
> should do when receiving an advertisement with multiple scenes in 
> order to get a sufficient representation of the advertised content.
>
> the room, and another scene for a presentation. In that case, one 
> should take something from each scene (typically one CSE from each) to 
> get "enough".
>
> included "copies" of all the scenes it receives in advertisements, 
> with encodings for them all.
>
> In a "simple" case with an MCU use MCC, it might "pass through" all 
> the advertisements it receives, for their spatial info, but not 
> provide any encodings for them. Rather, it would provide one or more 
> new scenes using MCC to aggregate those sources. Then one would not 
> want to configure from the "pass through" scenes, but that isn't an 
> option anyway if there are no encodings for them.
[CNG] The idea of the pass through information was that the consumer 
could use any capture attribute (not just spatial ones) to determine 
what media it wanted.
>
> Mark has proposed using multiple scenes with MCC to illustrate 
> switched cases where some groupings don't have any spatial 
> relationship to one another. Some of those examples end up with 
> multiple scenes that do have encodings, where it doesn't make sense to 
> configure something from each scene.
[CNG] I don't think there's anything in the framework that says a 
consumer must choose a capture from a scene.
>
> Today we discussed using priority to solve this, but this isn't really 
> a priority problem, it is a problem of *alternatives* that may be 
> equally desirable, depending on the resources or desires of the consumer.
[CNG] I agree I don't think priority is the right solution for this.
>
> IMO the problem is that our CSE mechanism is a way for the advertiser 
> to suggest alternatives, but this only works on a per-scene basis. The 
> Instead of one CSE list per scene, have one CSE list 
> per-advertisement, referencing captures from any scene.
>
> This makes it possible for the advertiser to recommend combinations 
> that cross scene boundaries.
[CNG] Perhaps you could give some examples? Does the list need to be 
exhaustive?
e.g. the simple case today
Scene1 CSE1(VC1,VC2,VC3)
        CSE2(VC4)
Scene2 CSE3(VC5,presentation1)

Does it mean now the Advertisement would now have to advertise?
CSE1(VC1,VC2,VC3,VC5)
CSE2(VC4,VC5)
CSE3(VC1,VC2,VC3)
CSE4(VC4)
CSE5(VC5)

> _______________________________________________
> clue mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/clue
>