- From: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:02:56 +0200
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, public-media-capture@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 7:16 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: > Hi, > > This is a follow-up discussion to > https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=257104 > > The WebRTC specification needs to provide a better error message in case the > browser denies access to the camera, instead of the user. Currently, the > specification states that PERMISSION_DENIED is the result of the user > denying access. Instead of simply modifying the definition of > PERMISSION_DENIED to cover both cases, I propose splitting it into separate > cases: > > PERMISSION_DENIED_BY_USER > PERMISSION_DENIED_BY_BROWSER > > Alternatively, we need to add a String error message alongside the enum, and > require browsers to issue a different error message for each case. Why? What do you plan to do in your web page if you had this additional information today? If this information can be used to improve the user experience then it would be good to know what the use cases are. My hunch is that, if anything, this change opens the door to allowing web sites to developing a negative attitude toward users who deny camera access and for those pages to potentially continually bug users who have explicitly rejected camera permissions until they accept (or give in and leave the web page frustrated). That would not be a good outcome here. Whether the permission is denied by the user, the platform, by some content policy or by some future permissions management system should largely be irrelevant for web pages. Also, it would be better to discuss this on public-media-capture@w3.org (I've CCed that list and any follow-up posts should remove public-webrtc@w3.org from replies). br/ Rich
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 09:03:27 UTC