- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:55:43 -0400
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 9/3/14 2:39 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > I think that I like replace, mainly because this is an operation that > can fail. If the source is a camera that produces a different codec, > then it is going to fail. > > Rather than trigger onnegotiationneeded, I think we should make this a > silent operation that only succeeds for compatible tracks. I think that aligns best with the purpose of the API being to avoid negotiationneeded. >> 2. Why would it matter at all what MediaStream the track is in? I >> don't see why it would matter. And for that matter, when would you >> have two video tracks in a MediaStream in the first place? What does >> that even mean? > The definition of compatible tracks probably doesn't need to be > limited to tracks in the same stream. Though the potential for the > tracks to be synchronized seems best, since if we aren't sending any > other signals, a disjoint time sequence would cause errors. I guess mediaStreams were meant to be a structural indication of "these things are (meant to be?) synchronized", while in reality, as I understand it, timestamps are tied to capture sender-side, and synced up receiver-side. .: Jan-Ivar :.
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 18:56:14 UTC