Paul/Ernst:
 
Two questions for my clarification:
- How frequently would such contents be updated?
- Is the intent for such material to be normative or informative?
 
Simao
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej@PACKETIZER.COM]
Sent: jeudi, 16. mai 2002 05:52
To: ITU-SG16@echo.jf.INTEL.COM
Subject: Re: Rec. H.501 and "GEF" parameter repository

Ernst,
 
I do agree that we need a single place to list these.  In the past, the thinking was to list such things in the Implementers Guide, but I'm more inclined to argue that H.460.1, perhaps Annex A (non-existent) would be the right place.
 
Paul
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Horvath Ernst
To: ITU-SG16@echo.jf.INTEL.COM
Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 8:08 AM
Subject: Rec. H.501 and "GEF" parameter repository

Dear experts,

my H.501 final draft contained  a placeholder "annex B" for collecting "generic data" (i.e. standardized GEF identifier values). Upon advice by TSB, this annex will be removed in the published version 1 of H.501 since it contained no useful text.

The initial idea was to include here material from H.225.0 annex G as soon as version 2 of annex G is finished. But now I have some doubts whether H.501 is the right place for such a data register. A repository of generic data should at least include also values assigned in GEF standards (H.460.x). Wouldn't the H.460 series be a better place for this?

At the top level we have assigned so far:
- feature ID "0" for H.225.0 Annex G profiles
- feature IDs "n" for H.460.n
(is this the complete list?)

Each top-level feature ID opens a local name space for EnumeratedParameter-IDs specified for that specific feature. Since these are defined locally there is no danger of collisions.

At least the top-level IDs should be maintained at a central place to avoid collisions, especially if such IDs can be assigned outside H.460.n standards as well (is this generally the case, or is H.225.0 annex G the only exception?). Of course such a repository could also list the locally assigned EnumeratedParameter-IDs for each registered feature, to provide a quick reference.

So the question is, do people see the need for a generic-data register, and if yes, in which form? H.460.x? Or in an IG? H.501 does not seem to be the proper place.

Regards,
Ernst Horvath
Siemens AG