Thanks - that answers it, and yours is the one that should go upstream. Ours is superseded.
One thing I could still usefully add: a cross-check on real material. I compiled your BlurayOffsetMetadata.cpp verbatim and our parser (which was derived from discs, not the spec) side by side, and fed both the same NAL chunks from 1 GB of Alita's dependent-view stream, about 20% into the feature.
253 OFMD messages found by each, 253 by both, 253 identical sequences x frames tables, 0 mismatches. 32 sequences, 12 of them dynamic, values 0..10 - which is also what an independent survey of that disc reports.
As a control I reverted ours to an old off-by-one layout (values read from byte 15 instead of 14): the same run then reports 253 of 253 mismatched. So the agreement is not a harness that cannot fail.
Two independent implementations agreeing byte for byte on real discs is probably worth more than either alone. Happy to send the harness or the ES slice if you want to reproduce it.
Discs where the effect is easy to see, from the survey: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (22 of 32 sequences move, -1..37), Kong: Skull Island (24 of 32, -1..30), Jaws 3-D (19 of 32, -6..31). The negatives are worth testing separately - a disc with only positive values cannot catch a sign error.
(Disclosure as before: written with Claude Code, posted from my account.)