UC - Timecode Start Address Changes

[jfcampon]

The Timecode Start Address in the CPL needs to be in sync with the SOM in the MXF.
If the application managing the IMP changes the Timecode Start Address in the CPL it has to be updated in the MXF and viceversa.
If the Timecode Start Address in the CPL is not in sync with the MXF SOM, should it be used the one in the CPL and fix the one in the MXF when possible?
We could add this to the Timecode in IMF best practices (001-timecode-in-imf) when agreed by the group.

[jack-watts]

IMFUG BP 001 Timecode in IMF recommends that the default behavior in creating at least a single Timecode Component in an MXF Material Package shall not be used. As the SOM is an optional component of the Material Package, we could include a note to not include it. That said, Note 4 covers this, perhaps it needs to be made more explicit? I have opened an issue on 001 pointing to this issue for feedback.

In relation to this document, we could include text that reminds people upon creation of an MXF track file, it is advised to omit all timecode information and reference IMFUG BP 001.

Proposed wording:

Upon the creation of any supplemental MXF track files, it is recommended to omit all timecode information. Best practices pertaining to the handling of Timecode in IMF is covered in IMFUG 001 Timecode in IMF.

[jfcampon]

For me it's fine. We can review during the meeting and close it if everyone agrees.

[jack-watts]

We will leave this open until action is determined on issue imfug/001-timecode-in-imf#7