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

Re: Capture API question

From: Arun Ranganathan <arun@mozilla.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:22:35 -0700
Message-ID: <4C1FBBFB.3080609@mozilla.com>
To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
CC: "Tran, Dzung D" <dzung.d.tran@intel.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "Ingmar.Kliche" <Ingmar.Kliche@telekom.de>, "Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com" <Ilkka.Oksanen@nokia.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@robineko.com>, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>, "public-device-apis@w3.org" <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Brad Lassey <blassey@mozilla.com>, Doug Turner <dougt@mozilla.com>, "khuey@mozilla.com" <khuey@mozilla.com>
On 6/21/10 12:04 PM, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 21 Jun 2010, at 20:57, Arun Ranganathan wrote:
>> Hi Dzung,
>> On 6/18/10 9:17 AM, Tran, Dzung D wrote:
>>> Yes, I think Arun's suggestion is fine and does aligned with some of the discussions going on in HTML5 WG.
>> If such a thing exists, can you point me to a thread on either public-html or whatwg that discusses input type for camera invocation?  I think the existing editor's draft covering the accept attribute [1] doesn't include Andrei's/Google's proposes enhancement for capture scenarios, and we should discuss these within HTML.  This should supplement DAP WG's interface specification.  If we don't have a such a thread, one of us should start one within HTML WG :-)
> While we're on that one, what are the reasons to overload MIME syntax in @accept instead of adding a separate attribute that triggers a relevant sensor, when present?

Minimizing attributes is nice; I don't think this is overloading. 
Rather, by including @accept in the first place, we may have all that we 

At the risk of bikeshedding, what is your proposal, and why is it better?

Currently, it seems we have Andrei's proposal:

<input type="file" accept="image/*;source=camera">  [1]

Upon reflection, I'm not sure if we even need the extra ";source=camera" 
part.  Our implementation doesn't use it, and thus we have the existing 
use of @accept which seems sufficient.  Andrei, do you think we actually 
need the additional qualifier?  If so, why?

-- A*
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Jun/0106.html
Received on Monday, 21 June 2010 19:23:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:44 UTC