- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:50:49 -0800
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
On 02/09/2012 12:00 PM, Randell Jesup wrote: > On 2/9/2012 10:10 AM, Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com wrote: >> (5) 2.4.1.2 picture-in-picture >> >> Is this really picture-in-picture, or capture of multiple time-sync'd >> videos that can subsequently be edited? Sounds like the latter. > > I think Travis added this after I commented on the list; in any case I > was driving towards synchronized capture from both cameras, not > locally composited before saving. You could make an argument that > local compositing and recording multiple streams are equivalent from > this view of the spec (in terms of requirements), but I think they're > different in how users understand them. If the requirements work out > the same, I'm ok with it. The reason I suggested picture-in-picture as a variant was that having both exposed "record multiple streams" and "manipulate streams and record the result" as two separate requirements. Harald
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 22:51:19 UTC