W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > January 2010

RE: Camera properties (Re: [sysinfo] draft ready for review)

From: David Rogers <david.rogers@omtp.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:29:32 -0000
Message-ID: <4C83800CE03F754ABA6BA928A6D94A0601F0C948@exch-be14.exchange.local>
To: "Max Froumentin" <maxfro@opera.com>, "Thomas Roessler" <tlr@w3.org>
Cc: <public-device-apis@w3.org>
I think the majority of devices are going to be mobile, but who's to say that a decent camera isn't going to contain a 3G module in the future? I think the question is really whether we want to push this back to version 2.0 or not - at the moment, 99% of devices using this will be your average mobile phone cameras (and we're talking multi-millions of devices).


-----Original Message-----
From: public-device-apis-request@w3.org [mailto:public-device-apis-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Max Froumentin
Sent: 06 January 2010 11:19
To: Thomas Roessler
Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Subject: Re: Camera properties (Re: [sysinfo] draft ready for review)

On 05/01/2010 17:53, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> The camera API looks like it's focused on a really cheap camera.  I
> wonder whether we want to go down the route of describing things
> like
> - aperture - shutter - sensor dimension (both physical and pixel) -
> ISO speed - focal length - camera orientation - flash on or off for
> the next capture?

Fair enough. After the discussion at [1] I didn't think much more about 
what to put in there, and what to leave to the Capture API. The current 
list (supportsVideo, hasFlash, sensorPixels, maxZoomFactor) contains 
properties which are fixed, while I think that variable attributes 
(zoom, aperture, ISO, etc.) should go to Capture. But it's a very fine 
line, and the question is noted in an issue in the draft, awaiting 

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2009Dec/0192.html


Received on Wednesday, 6 January 2010 11:30:06 UTC

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