Re: Strawman Promises consensus position, based on Thursday's telechat

I can live with it.

- Jim
On 10/3/2014 6:00 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> *<<*At the end of Thursday's telechat, there was still no smooth 
> consensus of the TF detected.
>
> However, there was a position proposed that might serve as something 
> people could live with.
> I've tried to capture it below; I'd like people on the list to reply 
> with one of:
>
> "I can live with it"
> "I cannot live with it"
>
> This is done in order to get a sense of the group - I have a feel, but 
> want it verified.
> I'm sure there will be other comments. Bring them on.
>
> --------------
> *
>
> On the promises, the following is the strawman consensus position:
>
>
> In the version of getusermedia that gets sent out for Last Call, we 
> make the following changes:
>
>
>  *
>
>     navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia gets changed to return a promise.
>
>  *
>
>     applyConstraint returns a promise.
>
>  *
>
>     enumerateDevices returns a promise.
>
>  *
>
>     navigator.getUserMedia has callbacks
>
>  *
>
>     We do not re-discuss whether or not to remove
>     navigator.getUserMedia from the spec in the foreseeable future (2
>     years?)
>
>
> <<< note: I*'**m not sure if the next piece belongs or not. It serves 
> to make the definition complete,
> and was certainly described in Jan-Ivar's slides. Comments welcome. >>>
>
> *
>
> The definition of navigator.getUserMedia in the spec will be that it 
> will behave exactly like:
>
>
> navigator.prototype.getUserMedia = function(constraints, success, 
> failure) {
>   var p = navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia(constraints);
>   p.then(success, failure);
> }
>
> *
> -------------
>
> Fire away!
>