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

Re: revised recording proposal

From: Timothy B. Terriberry <tterriberry@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 08:52:23 -0800
Message-ID: <50B792C7.7090609@mozilla.com>
To: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Jim Barnett wrote:
 > There hasn't been much discussion of this on the list.  (If it 
matters, in the
 > speech recognition case, the buffers are likely to be about 200ms in 
size,
 > though of course we can't guarantee that apps won't ask for other sizes.)

For any audio-only use-case, we could store several minutes of 
compressed audio in the same space it takes to store one uncompressed HD 
video frame for display.

> Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:
>> My understanding is that existing GC's handle the two data types very
>> differently (if I go into more details I may have to start discussing
>> proprietary implementations).

If your argument is, "You should do X, but I can't tell you why because 
secretz," you're not likely to get a lot of agreement from the rest of 
us engineers. AFAIK, in _our_ implementation the lifetime of Blobs and 
ArrayBuffers are controlled in exactly the same way (there are 
differences in how the actual collection happens because the GC knows 
about the backing array used to store the data in ArrayBuffers, but has 
to call a finalizer to NS_RELEASE the nsIDOMBlob for Blobs, but I think 
those are completely irrelevant to this discussion).
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2012 16:52:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:12 UTC