W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Constraints or not ?

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 18:10:07 +0000
To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
CC: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB11332CB10@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>

wow - sorry - not sure how that happened but  you are right I was looking at the wrong version


On Jan 2, 2013, at 11:01 PM, Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com> wrote:

> I think you are looking at v5. Sorry, I should have put a redirect in place to v6... but you can just change the 5 to a 6 in the URL and get to the most recent proposal.
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) [fluffy@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 1:06 PM
> To: Stefan Håkansson LK
> Cc: Cullen Jennings; public-media-capture@w3.org
> Subject: Constraints or not ?
> 
> On Dec 26, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2) seem to go against many of the decisions we already made about
>>> constraints.
>> 
>> Again, some elaboration would be nice. When I read the proposal I get the impression that it is well aligned to how we have been using constraints so far. You can use constraints when changing some settings in the same way as they have been proposed to be used with getUserMedia before if I understand correctly.
> 
> So I thought the WG had decided in the various WG meetings we were going to use constraints to set this sort of stuff, but when I read this doc, I see things like
> 
> pictureDevice.redEyeReduction.request(true,true);
> 
> This seems a completely different API model to me and given the amount of time that went into the constrains discussion, unless someone has a concrete example of where constraints can't work, I'm not keen on reopening that.
Received on Thursday, 3 January 2013 18:10:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:03 GMT