W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > August 2013

Re: Proposal: Time out for getUserMedia.

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 09:14:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXp10mECfgrhOZXFV2pKVPjfS=p_5JCmQaRxoxBk+nSAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
Cc: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 29 August 2013 21:42, Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think these are required features, for application developers.
> For 1. There are possibilities like pop-up may be closed many times
> knowingly or unknowingly. Then the application will wait for the
> getUserMedia() callback indefinitely. API implementation can solve this
> problem (as that in chromium).
> For 2. In the earlier implementations, pop-up will get the highest priority,
> and will not allow the user to do any operations until he answers it. But
> now, the pop-up allows user to continue his work even with out answering the
> pop-up. In this regard, there are chances like the pop-up many not be
> answered for long time and application will be waiting for the response. It
> will be better if getUserMedia() supports the time out case, to simplify the
> application implementation.
> This is just my thinking at this particular point of time. Some other people
> can have  their own use cases based on their design and implementation.

That didn't answer my question.  In both cases, this is something that
the browser implementation can handle.  Chrome doesn't, but it could
(and you might then argue that it should, but that's not our business

Why do you need application control over this?
Received on Friday, 30 August 2013 16:15:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:19 UTC