- From: ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ <tommyw@google.com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 11:32:33 +0200
- To: Anant Narayanan <anant@mozilla.com>
- Cc: public-media-capture@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CALLKCfNm-kBc_Zy69CSBvvw7u=1h8GpA05kFAcf6Zfb1YzkuGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Ping on this. Implementation details aside no other API takes a mix-n-match of different objects. An ordinary JS array with Tracks or a MediaStreamtrackList is still my strong preference. On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Tommy Widenflycht (ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ) < tommyw@google.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Anant Narayanan <anant@mozilla.com>wrote: > >> On 9/24/2012 11:36 AM, Tommy Widenflycht (ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ) wrote: >> >>> Well, a MediaStreamTrackList is fine as well :) >>> >>> The difficult to implement thingie is the "union of MediaStream, >>> MediaStreamTrackList and MediaStreamTracks". >>> >> >> It is either MediaStream or MediaStreamTrackList. It should not be >> possible to create a new MediaStream using only MediaStreamTracks (without >> first wrapping them in a list). >> >> > <snip> > The MediaStream() constructor takes zero or one argument. If the > argument, trackContainers, is supplied, it specifies a list of MediaStream<http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#idl-def-MediaStream> > ,MediaStreamTrackList<http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#idl-def-MediaStreamTrackList> > and MediaStreamTrack<http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#idl-def-MediaStreamTrack> > objects. > </snip> > >
Received on Monday, 8 October 2012 09:33:05 UTC