- From: Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 12:35:29 +0000
- To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Stefan, I agree. I was thinking that we should send them a link to our FPWD and ask for comments. - Jim -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Håkansson LK [mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 3:21 AM To: public-media-capture@w3.org Subject: Re: FW: Call for Consensus to publish a First Public Working Draft of "MediaStream Recording API", deadline 31 Jan 2013 [resend adding DAP] On 2013-01-24 17:35, Jim Barnett wrote: > Forwarding a discussion from another list. > > Glenn, > > It’s true that we have not been considering DVR/PVR as use cases. > Chairs, should we contact the Recording and Downloading Task force? > From looking at their wiki, it sounds like some of their use cases are > outside our defined scope, but it would be foolish if our work was > incompatible with what they need. Speaking with my chair hat on: yes, I think we should contact them. But I don't think we should let that stop the process to go to FPWD. We have a proposal that satisfies the scenarios we have defined, and publishing it could actually facilitate the discussions with teh "Recording and Downloading TF" as our work will become known to a broader audience. Stefan > > -Jim > > *From:*Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, January 24, 2013 11:14 AM > *To:* Jim Barnett > *Cc:* Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com; public-device-apis@w3.org; > public-webrtc@w3.org; W3C Web and TV; Ed Shrum > *Subject:* Re: Call for Consensus to publish a First Public Working > Draft of "MediaStream Recording API", deadline 31 Jan 2013 [resend > adding DAP] > > Thanks for your response. My primary concern for my first comment is > that this specification should be able to support DVR/PVR functions. > Although it doesn't seem specifically designed for this purpose, it > appears to provide significant support in that direction. I would also > note that the Web & TV IG has initiated a Recording and Downloading > Media task force [1] which I expect will produce a requirements > document. IMO, it would be detrimental if DAP produces a Media > recording API that does not satisfy the requirements coming from this activity. > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-and-tv/2012Nov/0033.htm > l > > Regards, > > Glenn > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Jim Barnett > <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com <mailto:Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>> wrote: > > Glenn, > > I’m not sure that I understand your first point. The API is defined > to work with any object of type MediaStream, whether local or remote. > If there is some other object that needs to be recorded, I would think > that the question would be how to convert it into a MediaStream. The > getUserMedia spec would be the right place to do that, or possibly a > separate spec, but the process should be transparent to the > MediaRecorder class. (There’s a separate discussion going on about > whether we want to taint certain MediaStreams to prevent recording for > security reasons, but that’s orthogonal to this issue, I think.) > > On the issue of where takePhoto() goes, it was originally a method on > VideoTrack. We moved it to the recorder class because it seemed to > have a lot in common with recording. I don’t particularly care where > it goes, though I wonder if a new interface is justified, given how > limited the functionality is. I’ll go with whatever the majority decides. > > -Jim > > *From:*Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com <mailto:glenn@skynav.com>] > *Sent:* Thursday, January 24, 2013 9:21 AM > *To:* Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com <mailto:Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> > *Cc:* public-device-apis@w3.org <mailto:public-device-apis@w3.org>; > public-webrtc@w3.org <mailto:public-webrtc@w3.org> > > > *Subject:* Re: Call for Consensus to publish a First Public Working > Draft of "MediaStream Recording API", deadline 31 Jan 2013 [resend > adding DAP] > > >From my brief read of this draft, I have the following comments: > > * Document should describe how it the mechanisms defined can be used > to record media streams deriving from non-local devices, > specifically, how to record media streams obtained from external > servers, e.g., streams fetched and presented by HTMLMediaElement. > * The members takePhoto() and onphoto should be moved to a separate > interface to make the MediaRecorder interface more generic, and not > tied to specific types of media sources. > > Regards, > > Glenn > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:31 AM, <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com > <mailto:Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>> wrote: > > DAP members: > > The Media Capture Task Force [a] is a joint Task Force of the DAP and > WebRTC working groups. This is a CfC to publish a FPWD of the > "MediaStream Recording API". > > Below I include the mail sent to the WebRTC mailing list, consider > this as a CfC for the Device APIs working group as well, and please > respond on the DAP public mail list as well as the public WebRTC > mailing list with either +1 or concerns. (I've cross-posted this mail > deliberately as CfC responses should be seen by all and I expect relatively low traffic). > > regards, Frederick > > Frederick Hirsch, Nokia > Chair, W3C DAP Working Group > > [a] http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/#mediacapture > > CfC sent to WebRTC list: > [[ > > During the Media Capture Task Force call on 6 December 2012 [1] we > agreed to start a CfC for a First Public Working Draft (FPWD) of the > "MediaStream Recording API" draft once Jim completed some additional > edits, which he has [2]. > > This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) for the WebRTC WG members to publish > of FPWD of this document. > > A FPWD is a draft and can thus continue to be edited and evolve, but > gives visibility of the work to a broader community, and is thus > useful. It also starts the call-for-exclusion process under the W3C > Patent Policy. > > As with all of our CfCs, positive response is preferred and encouraged > and silence will be considered as agreeing with the proposal. The > deadline for comments is Thursday January 31st and all comments should > be sent to public-webrtc at w3.org <http://w3.org>. We can then > publish the week after, assuming that works for the W3C team and editors. > > Stefan, for the chairs > > [1] Minutes: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2013Jan/0057. > html > > > [2] Draft: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2012Dec/att-0 > 159/RecordingProposal.html > > ]] > > > > >
Received on Friday, 25 January 2013 12:36:05 UTC