- 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