The following subclause indices '8.5.3.2.1' and '8.5.3.2.2' in JCT3V-N1003_r1 should be replaced by '8.5.3.2.2' and '8.5.3.2.3', respectively.

log2_parallel_merge_level_minus2 plus 2 specifies the value of the variable Log2ParMrgLevel, which is used in the derivation process for luma motion vectors for merge mode as specified in subclause 8.5.3.2.1 and the derivation process for spatial merging candidates as specified in subclause 8.5.3.2.2. The value of log2_parallel_merge_level_minus2 shall be in the range of 0 to CtbLog2SizeY − 2, inclusive.

encoder_intra_loco.cfg contains:

ChromaQpOffset : 2 ChromaQpOffset2nd : 2

which should be zero for common conditions

I found some weird condition from '8.5.3.2.3 Derivation process for combined bi-predictive merging candidates'.

A merging candidate list mergeCandList includes temporal merge candidate, but POC comparison between L0combCandk and L1combCandk does not consider the case that L0combCandk or L1combCandk comes from temporal merge candidate, as in below:

• ( DiffPicOrderCnt( RefPicList0[ refIdxL0l0Cand ], RefPicList1[ refIdxL1l1Cand ] ) != 0 ) | | ( mvL0l0Cand != mvL1l1Cand )

RefPicList0/1 are defined as L0/L1 list of a slice, so if l0Cand or l1Cand is temporal merging candidate then refPicListL0/1 of co-locate picture should be referred instead of RefPicList0/1.

And in case that, num_ref_idx_l0_active_minus1 of current slice is lesser than num_ref_idx_l0_active_minus1 of co-located picture, RefPicList0[ refIdxL0l0Cand ] can cause referencing on undefined value.

Is this intended behavior?