W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > December 2009

Re: First stab at the Capture API (aka Camera API)

From: Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 13:12:41 +0100
Cc: "Tran, Dzung D" <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-Id: <206A4DA0-CCAF-49AD-A048-6493AAF30C2B@robineko.com>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
On Dec 2, 2009, at 11:04 , Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> I think the document is quite close to a FPWD, as Robin mentioned; to
> facilitate the discussion on that point (i.e. to evaluate if we cover as
> much as the final scope as we want), here is a list of the requirements
> *it does NOT fullfill* to do at this point:
>      * must enable listing the available cameras 
>      * must enable listing the available audio input devices
>      * must enable listing the available formats and codecs, *per
>        capture device*
>      * must enable choosing preferred aspects of the captured content
>        (e.g. width, height, format, frame rate)
>      * should enable control of the camera's capabilities (e.g. zoom,
>        luminosity, night mode, focus mode)
>      * should enable setting of brightness, contrast, gain
>      * should enable displaying a viewfinder as part of the document
>        (e.g. as a video element [HTML5]) 
>      * should enable setting microphone audio level

These all fall neatly into the box of things that require greater integration (getting devices, controlling devices, and having them paint inside the viewport). I think that's rather encouraging as it points to a potential v1/v2 test that could be applied to other APIs as well.

Robin Berjon
  robineko  hired gun, higher standards
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2009 12:13:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:41 UTC