- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 10:17:33 +0200
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 04/08/2013 09:21 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Adam Bergkvist > <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com> wrote: >> On 2013-04-07 12:57, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >>> 2) The addtrack and removetrack events are not defined. In particular, >>> when they are dispatched. >> Both of the above issues were fixed recently, but haven't made it into a >> released version yet. They are available on github [1]. > The second issue does not appear to be fixed (the methods are not > dispatching these events). It's also unclear why you'd need a special > interface for this event given that you can get to the tracks on the > object already. They're dispatched in the webrtc spec (when tracks are added by other means than AddTrack). You need a special interface because you don't know the ID of the newly added track. > >>> 3) The constructor for MediaStream should probably a sequence of >>> MediaStreamTrack, not an IDL array. >> It's not a big deal, but wouldn't a sequence introduce an extra (and >> unnecessary) copy of the array when it's passed by value? Are there any >> general guidelines for array-like input arguments? I've seen that at least >> the WebSocket constructor uses a DOMString[] for its protocols argument. > You need a copy. If you'd actually pass by value the developer could > make further changes later that would have to be reflected by the > object, which is not what you want at all. > > With regards to WebSocket, that seems like a bug in WebSocket. > > >>> 4) "Constructor ()" should just be "Constructor", but maybe better >>> would be to make the single argument optional and use "or" to >>> distinguish the two types. >> Constructor (optional (MediaStream or MediaStreamTrack[]) trackContainer) >> >> What would work for me. The tricky thing is to come up with a suitable name >> for the single argument. It's easier when you simply can call it "data". :) > You can call it data, it doesn't matter, but it should really be sequence. > > >> [1] >> http://htmlpreview.github.io/?https://github.com/fluffy/webrtc-w3c/blob/master/getusermedia.html >> (note that links don't work) > > -- > http://annevankesteren.nl/ >
Received on Monday, 8 April 2013 08:18:06 UTC