- From: Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:45:20 +0000
- To: "Mandyam, Giridhar" <mandyam@quicinc.com>
- CC: "Hu, Ningxin" <ningxin.hu@intel.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Hi Giri,
> On 24 Mar 2015, at 09:00, Hu, Ningxin <ningxin.hu@intel.com> wrote:
[...]
> Besides the settings, regarding to ImageCapture constructor and FrameGrabEvent:
>
>>> 2. capture pipeline: by new ImageCapture(stream) in image capture pipeline. I propose to extend constructor of ImageCapture to take a MediaStream object instead of MediaStreamTrack object for aligned color+depth use case.
>>> 3. request a capture sample: by grabFrame().
>>> 4. data access: by extending FrameGrabEvent with depthMap. For {'video': true}, only imageData is populated. For {'depth': true}, only depthMap is populated. For {'video': true, 'depth': true}, both imageData and depthMap are populated by aligned capture.
>
> What do you think about this proposal?
... and here's the proposal in terms of IDL (consider strawman):
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2015Mar/0026.html
Please let us know what you think. We're happy to send PRs against the mediacapture-image spec. I suggest we bake the proposal in an experimental branch, and share it for wider review with the Task Force.
Thanks,
-Anssi
Received on Wednesday, 25 March 2015 16:45:53 UTC