site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: pro-apps-dev@lists.apple.com Hello all, Could anyone shed some light on this, please? Thanks, Rainer _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Pro-apps-dev mailing list (Pro-apps-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/pro-apps-dev/hju%40apple.com _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Pro-apps-dev mailing list (Pro-apps-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/pro-apps-dev/site_archiver%40lists.ap... Hi Rainer! You're right, on clips it is redundant. It is there for consistency with clipitems on sequences. Cheers, Helena On Jan 12, 2008, at 10:39 PM, Rainer Standke wrote: looking at FCP XMLs, there is a rate (as in: frame rate) given for the 'parent item' (either a clip or a sequence), and then there is a rate for each clipitem (as in: parent item/media/video/track/ clipitem). I can see how it is a good thing that one can mix clipitems with different rates, but I am wondering about the redundant(?) parent item's rate. In clips, isn't the clip's rate *always* the same as the video track's rate? And in sequences, isn't the sequence's rate *always* the same as the video track's? This email sent to hju@apple.com This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com