Thank you to all who participated in the first call re: CLF.
In my assessment, two “soft decisions” were reached on the first call:
-
The specification will remain XML.
There is no compelling enough justification to redefine the specification. There is a thread for discussion here. -
The specification should not contain optional parts.
A “common LUT format” where implementations are not required to implement support for all parts of the format loses its commonality. Discussion started here.
Additionally, it was suggested that the specification be made simpler by removing integer encodings. Discussion is on-going here, but so far there appear to be many reasons in favor of this suggestion and few reasons against it.
Please continue to discuss these items if you have a reaction, but please state your case in the relevant discussion threads linked above (or start a new one specific to your question).
Details for the next call will be sent out shortly.