On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > the entire Audio Output API would be implemented, but if we can at least >> > > enshrine the ability to use a MediaDeviceInfo.deviceId as the sinkID, >> that >> > is enough to allow meaningful output device selection in Web Audio. >> >> Doesn't the Audio Output API already cover that? >> > > Yes, it does -- that's why I suggested that implementing the Audio Output > API would be ideal. Perhaps that's already agreed, in which case this item > isn't going to generate much discussion, > To be very specific: The Web Audio API is a much lower-level API than the Audio Output API. Or, perhaps, there is a an API that underlies both of these that is lower level - but the right lowest level to get access to media output devices is certainly well below assigning a sinkid on a media element in HTML. Exposing additional information in this fashion would be great. Does >> this have to covered by this iteration of the Media Capture API? Or >> can you live with addition of the parameters later, either in a new >> version or a new specification? For instance, I'd argue that the >> Audio Output API is a good place to describe new output-specific >> attributes. > > I think the track count should be added in MC now; it's not output-specific.
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2015 21:03:59 UTC