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

RE: Comparing capture* API vs <input type="file" accept="...">

From: Tran, Dzung D <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:01:21 -0800
To: Arve Bersvendsen <arveb@opera.com>, Frederick Hirsch <frederick.hirsch@nokia.com>, Oksanen Ilkka <Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com>
CC: ext Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>
Message-ID: <753F67ADE6F5094C9F1DBA00D1BAA8D312C8B5F86E@orsmsx501.amr.corp.intel.com>
I am not sure about the comment that it does not have any user interface. It has a video window and potential controls for rotate, left, right, up, down, take snap shot, ..etc.

Dzung Tran
Intel Corp

-----Original Message-----
From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Arve Bersvendsen
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 10:53 AM
To: Frederick Hirsch; Oksanen Ilkka
Cc: ext Ian Hickson; Dominique Hazael-Massieux; public-device-apis
Subject: Re: Comparing capture* API vs <input type="file" accept="...">

On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:44:18 +0100, Frederick Hirsch  
<frederick.hirsch@nokia.com> wrote:

> I do not want to make this complicated, but am still trying to  
> understand the use case. What about a webcam (nanny cam, whatever) type  
> device, would that qualify as use case  needing programmatic non-user  
> interaction control?

A web cam/nanny cam would typically not have any user interface at all,  
except one it exposes over the network, through an embedded web or media  
server of some kind   In that case, you'd have a single application on the  
device.

-- 
Arve Bersvendsen

Opera Software ASA, http://www.opera.com/


Received on Saturday, 5 December 2009 00:01:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:02 GMT