W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > March 2012

Re: PROPOSAL: Simple image capture API

From: Anant Narayanan <anant@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 01:04:55 -0700
Message-Id: <2971948B-894A-4AC5-8EC0-943822733E17@mozilla.com>
To: public-media-capture@w3.org
On Mar 12, 2012, at 5:46 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> FWIW, I'm very skeptical of letting a "picture" control bypass the access restrictions.

I should have framed the sentence better, the access restrictions are not bypassed but rather implicit since the user would select the picture they would like to take in a preview window.

In more concrete terms, the same "doorhanger" (or some other prompt) that would appear when getUserMedia is called normally will also appear when {picture:true} is set. However, in this case the user will take action on the prompt as one discrete step (look at preview, click ok when you are happy), and then the site immediately gets a Blob of that image.

> Taking a snapshot once a second presents many of the same privacy violations as taking a video - and probably at better resolution.

This would result in the preview doorhanger appear every second though, so the user might catch on because of the annoyance. There would be no "remember me" option for {picture:true}, and thus no way to bypass the preview window.

> Stylistically, I note that the proposal says that the callback's signature depends on the options passed to getUserMedia.
> That doesn't look like Good Programming Style to me.

This is a good point, I think cramming it into getUserMedia is both confusing and un-elegant. Perhaps under a different name? I would like to see this in the getUserMedia spec document, however, as it solves a big use case (take a picture) without involving MediaStreams - which is good for both web developers and implementers :)

-Anant
Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2012 08:05:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:09 UTC