W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > December 2012

Re: New version of editors draft released (20121212)

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:27:04 +0100
Message-ID: <50CEE568.6020901@ericsson.com>
To: Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 2012-12-14 14:27, Dan Burnett wrote:
>
> On Dec 14, 2012, at 4:41 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
>

>> On 2012-12-13 14:59, Dan Burnett wrote:
>>> I agree that we decided to add "id".  I don't agree with
>>> removing "label".  My understanding from the f2f meeting was that
>>> we would end up with both MediaStream and MediaStreamTrack
>>> objects having both "id" (machine-generated) and "label"
>>> (human-generated) attributes.
>>
>> I remember us talking about the confusing regarding label meaning
>> something on MediaStream and something else on MediaStramTrack, but
>> I don't really recall the exact resolution.
>>
>> This edit was really a rename of what you refer to as the
>> "machine-generated" identifier from "label" to "id" to align with
>> MediaStreamTrack. We've never had a "human-generated" identifier on
>> MediaStream so it hasn't been removed. :)
>>
>> I'm not really convinced we need a human settable identifier on
>> MediaStream unless it's transported over a p2p connection (and we
>> have a use-case for that). If you want to assign a custom label to
>> a MediaStream on the local side you can simply add as many new
>> properties to it as you like (myStream.label = "Web Cam & headset
>> mic"; ).
>
> As long as MediaStream and MediaStreamTrack have the same (one or
> two) attributes, I'm happy.  I don't see any more need for a
> human-generated label on a MediaStreamTrack than on a MediaStream, by
> your argument above, and yet I believe we are keeping label on
> MediaStreamTrack.  They should be consistent.

As Martin pointed out in an other mail, it may be the wording 
"human-generated" that is part of the confusion here. Both label and id 
are generated by the UA (on track), but one is nicer to read for a 
humans (label: "USB Camera 1" comared to id: 124a1ea42ae4...)

I don't have anything against a label on MediaStream-level, I just don't 
know what it should say. A track represents one device, so in that case 
the label can describe the device. A stream, on the other hand, may 
represent everything from zero to n devices. What should the label be 
there? Should it change if more tracks are added to the stream?

In my reasoning above, I'm still talking about a label of the kind that 
track has: UA generated, but human readable. Is that what you mean as 
well or do you mean really human generated (i.e. not readonly)?

Regarding consistency with one or two properties, I don't think we need 
to have the same attributes describing streams and tracks since they 
represent totally different things. A label attribute on both levels may 
even be more confusing since they can't mean the same thing.

/Adam
Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 09:27:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 December 2012 09:27:30 GMT