Re: VideoStreamTrack: takePhoto()

On 04/08/2013 09:37 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>> On 04/07/2013 09:02 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>> WebApps does not have formal meetings.
>> Then how does it decide that a decision is made?
>> I'll take pointers to chairs' statements of consensus in archives too.
> Generally WebApps does not seem to run into that problem. I can only
> remember one somewhat largish technical dispute that was resolved by
> CfC in the last five years. In general the modus operandi is that
> editors make a call based on input from the WG and people should
> object to such calls within timely manner if they disagree (preferably
> constructively and almost definitely before implementations start).
>
> In any event, this seems like the wrong way to resolve this issue and
> will not help defend your eventual decision to the Director either. We
> should make decisions based on technical merit, not based on decisions
> or lack thereof of another WG.
Fully agreed. Your task is to convince us that the idea has technical merit.
You've described the idea itself. It's a programming pattern that has 
both supporters and detractors in other contexts - so it's not an 
obvious decision for this WG, and it involves matters in which this WG 
does not hold a significant amount of expertise. So we're looking for 
other support for the idea.

One possible argument that an idea has technical merit is that other 
people have put it into their specification, implemented it into their 
products, shipped software, and have had people use it successfully.

Another possible argument is that other people of known competence have 
looked carefully at it and documented a decision that they are going to 
use it because they judge that it has technical merit.

So far, all we have is your claim that other people are going to use it.

Received on Monday, 8 April 2013 08:28:24 UTC