[vdr] Re: vdr at dbox2

[Ragnar Sundblad <ragge@nada.kth.se>]

--On den 28 februari 2004 13:39 +0100 Holger Waechtler <holger@qanu.de> 
wrote:

> Yes, TS was initially intended as transport format for broadcasting
> services, but since you can simply include useful meta informations like
> SI data, recording timestamps, teletext and subtitles into your recording
> by simply enabling the appropriate PID filters it is well-suited as
> archive format too.
Agreed. Actually, there is a SI style thing defined for PS too,
called PSM (H.222/138181 2.5.4), would be useful in VDR
recordings too. (In my teletext subtitling plugin I now store
stream metadata, languages, page numbers and such, in a self
made teletext page instead, it would be more standards
compliant to store it in a SI/PSM metadata blurb).

Another argument for TS is that you can reliably separate all
different data types that use for example private-stream-1
(ac3, teletext, dvb subtitles, EPG) without having to make only
educated guesses about each packet's contents, since you can
store the different streams with different PIDs.
Separating teletext data from ac3 currently happens to be easy
with the current vdr format, dvb subtitles aren't quite as
easy since they are often larger than one vdr PES packet and
I think they don't have the special PES packet header
properties that teletext has in the specification.

> The 'real' format that was intended for archives was probably PS, not PES.
Yes, and I think a standard PES stream is actually supposed to
contain only one data stream (2.5.2.4).

The vdr format is very simple and very similar to PS without
all the troubles of generating it, which is nice. A TS may be
better in the long run, though.

/ragge



--
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe vdr" as subject.