- From: Rob Manson <roBman@buildAR.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:43:51 +1000
- To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, Chia-Hung Tai <ctai@mozilla.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>, Ehsan Akhgari <eakhgari@mozilla.com>, David Baron <dbaron@mozilla.com>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@mozilla.com>, Randell Jesup <rjesup@mozilla.com>, "Kuo, Tzu-Hao" <tkuo@mozilla.com>, Martin Thomson <mt@mozilla.com>, "Kostiainen, Anssi" <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com>, Ningxin Hu <ningxin.hu@intel.com>
Hi Eric, I understand the need for the WG to focus on all the work required for the core WebRTC use case of peer-to-peer communication (e.g. video conferencing, data sharing, etc). But part of our new charter does explicitly describe this type of work. Video Stream Functions An extension of the Media Stream Functions to process video streams, to enable features such as bandwidth limiting, image manipulation or "video mute". http://www.w3.org/2015/07/webrtc-charter.html e.g. ...process video streams, to enable...image manipulation... I'm happy to be contradicted by the W3C staff - but I would think setting up a whole new WG for this work may be prohibitive. Dom? And by this work's very nature it will definitely relate to Timed Media, HTML (MediaElement), CanvasContext2D and WebGL. But I think getUserMedia is at the heart of this and it has already stimulated a lot of productive discussion related to the Media Capture and Streams Depth Extension too. This is also likely to help flesh out the Camera Control API too. But however it proceeds I'd like to positively support the need for this work - wherever it fits. roBman On 27/07/15 7:25 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote: > Chia-Hung, > > I do not support adding this item to the work of the WebRTC WG. The WG > has an enormous amount to do already and this is largely orthogonal to the > major thrust of our efforts, which is to enable real-time applications > (e.g., > video conferencing.) > > It's a particularly bad idea to form a task force for this. While perhaps > necessary at the time for the specific case of getUserMedia, it has been > a real hassle to have fragmented discussion of WebRTC-related topics. > > If you want to pursue standardization of this technology, you should form > a separate W3C WG. You might also consider taking it to the > Timed Media WG. > > -Ekr > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:12 AM, Chia-Hung Tai <ctai@mozilla.com > <mailto:ctai@mozilla.com>> wrote: > > Hi, Chairs, Dom and all, > > This is Chia-hung Tai from Mozilla. I would like to add a new > working items, "MediaStream with worker"[1] into WebRTC WG and form > a new task force for this specification. This working item is based > on a project called FoxEye[2]. You can check the use cases in [3]. > > This specification extends the Media Capture and Streams > specification to allow JavaScript developers to process video frame > data in workers on the web applications. > > I already implement a prototype based on the spec[1]. And get > positive feedbacks from Mozilla DOM peers. I think it should be > standardized. You can see the demo in [4]. Looking forward to hear > your voices. Thanks > > [1]: http://chiahungtai.github.io/mediacapture-worker/ > [2]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project_FoxEye > [3]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project_FoxEye#Use_Cases > [4]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prybkXsTGXY > > BR, > CTai > >
Received on Monday, 27 July 2015 09:42:23 UTC