W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture-logs@w3.org > December 2016

Re: [mediacapture-record] Bugs in isTypeSupported() example

From: ddorwin via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 20:20:46 +0000
To: public-media-capture-logs@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-265844486-1481228444-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@alvestrand, where is this defined? Walking the tree was mostly 
theoretical, but I don't think implementations consider `"video/webm"`
 to be fully specified. For example, Chrome returns `"maybe"` rather 
than `"probably"` just as we do for `"video/mp4"`. "maybe" is also 
specified in the container guidelines referenced in 

I think the definition should be reevaluated, especially given 
conflicting information and implementations. Generic language like 
that referenced in #92 would avoid this being a problem with the 
recording interface (If `"video/webm"` is fully specified then it 
would be technically sufficient. However, as a practical matter, I 
would strongly encourage implementations of this API to treat is as 
not fully specified as appears to be the case for implementations of 
other APIs.)

GitHub Notification of comment by ddorwin
Please view or discuss this issue at 
 using your GitHub account
Received on Thursday, 8 December 2016 20:20:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:27:30 UTC