- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 11:13:48 +0900
On Tue, 04 May 2010 11:01:14 +0900, Julien Cayzac <julien.cayzac at gmail.com> wrote: > I've been reading lately about the new proposed <device> element, and > was wondering if it was needed at all. > IMHO, a video originating from an attached camera is not different > from a video originating from the network, so <video> could be used > here. > Displaying the webcam in a page could be done like this: > > <video autoplay controls> > <source src="webcam:640,480,25" /> <!-- 640x480, 25fps --> > <source src="webcam:320,240,*" /> <!-- will be tried if the webcam > doesn't support the above settings --> > <source src="mire.mp4" /> <!-- no webcam attached? show this video > instead --> > </video> > > Same could be done with <audio> for adding microphone support, and in > both cases the browser should notify the user the page is requesting > permission to access these devices. > > Now, I am aware HTMLMediaElement doesn't offer any methods to actually > query the data it serves or to get notified as more incoming data gets > received, which makes my proposal useless. Still, such methods could > be used in other scenarios, like a browser-based video editing app, so > adding them would make sense in my opinion. What is the model for protecting user privacy here? Large part of the motivation for something like the <device> element is that the user is actively involved in giving the website the ability to access the user's camera stream and use it. (E.g. manipulate it through <canvas> or transmit it over the wire using WebSocket.) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 3 May 2010 19:13:48 UTC