Re: Proposal: Time out for getUserMedia.


I don't mean that application want complete control over this, but I mean
that these features are useful for application developers for a better
In the due course of implementation, application may get some control,
like, when we consider the cases highlighted by Gili.


On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Martin Thomson <>wrote:

> On 29 August 2013 21:42, Kiran Kumar <> 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
> anymore).
> Why do you need application control over this?

Received on Saturday, 31 August 2013 07:50:17 UTC