W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > December 2011

Re: use cases not covered by media capture under DAP

From: Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:00:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CADVgkyO3iUn+yp=TsC4zqt0aevCKNmHBPiu4R4mab3wx2chiEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
>>- image source (many camera sensors common now, select from photo
>>lib/gallary VERY common)
> Can you clarify this? Are you saying that the camera loads an image from the local file system? For what purpose?

For all the same purposes as taking it live. Just another option, and
a common one in native app land. Pick a picture or take one. You get
the idea.

>>- image destination (local to app, to the SD card, filesystem, as base64 string)
> In the W3C the Blob is the best we've got for a generic transfer mechanism. There are already established ways of extracting data from a Blob via the FileReader API [4] (dataURI, string, typedarray, etc.). The Streams API proposal [5] also lets you do most of the same for a Stream content (including extracting chunks into Blobs).

Right.. we've implemented FileReader/FileWriter too. We also added a
few other goodies such as FileTransfer which is sorta like XHR2 (but
predates it).

Anyhow, point is, those cases come up in the installable web app
world. Sandbox or no.
Received on Thursday, 1 December 2011 00:00:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:08 UTC