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

Re: CfC: The Media Capture API FPWD

From: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:22:33 +0200
Message-ID: <4C7ED229.9010503@opera.com>
To: Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com
CC: public-device-apis@w3.org
Here's a list of feedback I had on the current editor's draft. The spec 
is starting to look good.

I don't mind tackling these before or after FPWD publication.

1. Perhaps we should have some consistency between ContactFindOptions 
and CaptureImageOptions, CaptureVideoOptions, CaptureAudioOptions? 
ContactFindOptions uses 'multiple' and 'limit' from the HTML File Input 
element while CaptureXOptions is using 'maxNumberOfMediaFiles'.

2. Could CaptureVideoOptions and CaptureAudioOptions extend 
CaptureImageOptions (with CaptureImageOptions being renamed to 
CaptureOptions)?

3. What is the correct result of 'supportedImageFormats', 
'supportedVideoFormats' and 'supportedAudioFormats'? The 'MediaFileData' 
interface includes things like 'duration' which probably don't make too 
much sense here. Either we could split 'codec' from the full 
'MediaFileData' or split 'duration' out for the reverse but equally 
workable case.

4. I never understood the difference between nullable and optional. In 
Contacts everything that is optional is also nullable. I don't see why 
not (?)

5. How come we're using 'FileList' in the success callbacks? I thought 
we had 'MediaList' in the HTML Media Capture API (for multiple 
'MediaFile' objects) but I've misplaced it in the latest editor's draft.

6. What happens if I have a pending callback and the user/page initiates 
a second request to access media data? Is it queued, cancelled pending 
completion of the first operation or something else? Might be worth 
fleshing out the 'CaptureError' interface for this and other potential 
error cases to be included.


Thanks,

Rich


Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Robin is away, but we agreed  at the teleconference today to start a call for consensus on the Media Capture API, ending next week ( publication will include the change from ACTION-267 to add the note regarding ISSUE-101 to the text, this has not been done yet.) [1]
>
> This is a call for consensus to see if there are any objections to publishing the Media Capture API as a FPWD.
>
> The draft can be read at:
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/Overview-API.html
>
> Note that there is no requirement on API FPWDs to be perfect  if they were perfect we'd go straight to LC. They need to be good for broader review, and reasonably feature-complete.
>
> Where CfCs are concerned, silence is considered to be assent, but positive support is preferred (even if simply with a +1). Please send feedback before next Tuesday (Sept 6) as much as possible.
>
> Thanks!
>
> regards, Frederick
>
> Frederick Hirsch, Nokia
> Co-Chair, W3C DAP Working Group
>
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-device-apis/2010Sep/att-0007/minutes-2010-09-01.html#item08
>
>
>
>    


-- 
Rich Tibbett
Opera Software ASA
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 22:23:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:14:12 GMT