- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 23:11:45 +0200
- To: public-audio@w3.org
Den 20. mai 2015 18:00, skrev Joe Berkovitz: > > > 1. For audio devices, channel count and a binaural (essentially, > > speaker-vs-headphone) flag are important attributes. > > Query - are these distinct attributes or points on the same continuum? > > ie will a monaural device always have channel count 1? Or is the > "binaural" flag specifically for the headphone case, with "each ear of > the listener hears one and only one channel"? > > > These are distinct attributes. "Binaural" means the device delivers a > signal to each ear of the listener separately, as in headphones. > > Although it seems this might be restricted to the 2-channel case, > perhaps it's better not to legislate that. The species might evolve :-) > > > 2. How would the WG feel about including more "filtered" information in > > the MediaDeviceInfos returned by enumerateDevices(), other than the > > device label -- information that the application can use to restrict or > > augment the list of devices displayed to a user (since constraints are > > not accepted by enumerateDevices())? Ideally channel count, binaural, > > sample rate and other attributes such as width and height could be > > exposed here. > > Query - do you think of these things as singular attributes or as a > range of possible values? IE some devices are capable of being > configured into multiple sample rates - what info would you want? > > > Hmmm, I hadn't considered. If the information is returned in each > MediaDeviceInfo object then perhaps a range would be necessary. In which > case the approach of submitting constraints to enumerateDevices() (to be > ignored if filtering is in effect) might be superior. > > > Also - what do you think of when you say "width" and "height" here? Are > you thinking of video sources, or is there something new here? > > > I was thinking of video sources. > > > > If we don't care about fingerprinting, exposing the result of calling > getCapabilities() on a device might be OK. Or not.... > > > I think that may not work for this purpose because one would have to > call getUserMedia() for every device in the enumerated list... with lots > of permission grant interactions with the user. I was thinking in terms of returning in the result of enumerateDevices() data structures for each device containing what would have been the result if you called getCapabilities() on a track connected to that device. Fingerprints can't get much better than that. > > . . . . . ...Joe
Received on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 21:12:15 UTC