RE: <device> proposal (for video conferencing, etc)

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Hickson, Ian wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Dec 2009, Tran, Dzung D wrote:
>> >> How do you envision your work integrate with Device API WG's current 
>> >> spec? Is there some hand off between your <device> selector and 
>> >> Device API? Or not?
>> >
>> > Which spec did you have in mind?
>> I was thinking of the current work with the Capture APIs as: 
> Oh I assumed that this API was for the widget case -- in HTML4, you can 
> already do static image capture and non-streaming video or audio capture, 
> using <image type=file accept=...>. It's not widely supported yet, but 
> HTML5 elaborated a little on the idea and from talking with browser 
> vendors I wouldn't be surprised to see it implemented in the near future.

I don't the intent of the WG is only provide APIs for widget case. If you think that the browser vendors will support the <image type=file accept=...> and the work you are doing with <device> happen in the near future then maybe there is no need for Capture API.

>> I think in one of the example from Andrei Popescu you could handle the 
>> non-streaming capture as:
>> <device type="mediaFile" onchange="update(">
>> function update(file) {  // file is an object that implements interface File
>> }
> This seems redundant with existing features. I'd be very reluctant to 
> introduce multiple ways to do things.


On another note, In the Device API WG, we were looking at sensors as in such things as: Proximity, NFC, Pressure, Ambient Light, Hall sensors...etc. This seems to fit into your <device> tag. 


Dzung Tran

Received on Thursday, 17 December 2009 18:19:04 UTC