W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc-logs@w3.org > June 2019

Re: [webrtc-pc] Permission API for receive-only media and data use cases (#2175)

From: youennf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 16:41:47 +0000
To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-499955574-1559925705-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
> There are use cases that do not use `getUserMedia`, namely unidirectional audio/video or data only use cases. For example, security cameras, baby monitors, town-hall sessions, drones, MOOCs, remote device access, easy file transfer, multiplayer games, etc. all of which can greatly benefit from mode 1.

So far, the only configuration I saw that would benefit from mode 2 is two browsers doing data channel.
There are indeed some valid use cases there.
Whenever one of the two peer is not a browser, mode 3 on the browser is usually good enough.

As of mode 1, Safari is not supporting it even when getUserMedia access is granted. I doubt that a specific permission would actually help moving this forward.

> Now, UX is hard. This is a second-tier category of permission, not good for a modal prompt.

Non blocking UI has some advantages, it also has some drawbacks.
As a user, in most cases, I will not notice and not care of this new permission since it will not block my workflow and will often have no impact on my user experience.

In the cases it might actually help granting this permission, I will have difficulties relating this permission with the issues I am facing. The only chance is the website to guide me through accepting this permission. Should they do that upfront (bad for privacy) or just when I have an issue (bad for UX)? If I grant permission, and the connection does not happen, is it some kind of a trap?

If I discover this permission, it might be hard for me to understand the implications behind that choice.
What is 'direct-connection'? What am I revealing? What is mode 1, mode 2? If I am disallowing the 'direct-connection', does it mean I only allow TURN candidates?
As a UX, it looks to me like an option for power users.

UX is hard, and there may be other ways to handle that.
Having this permission surfacing as a web concept might be a good idea.
It might allow describing what browsers are doing and what browsers might do in the future.

> adding this permission might actually help free initial connection from being behind a permission prompt.

I also somehow like this idea.
At the same time, web developers can already do it now.
If they do not do it, maybe that is not such a big user experience issue.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by youennf
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/2175#issuecomment-499955574 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 7 June 2019 16:41:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 7 June 2019 16:41:49 UTC