- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 13:28:08 +0200
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
On 07/16/2013 06:59 PM, cowwoc wrote:
> Hi,
>
> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#the-model-sources-sinks-constraints-and-states
> doesn't seem to cover the following use-case:
>
> A multiparty video chat is initiated. An automated peer joins the call
> and captures all incoming video to disk in the same format that was
> used over the wire (meaning, without having to re-encode it).
>
> The specification only seems to deal with browser peers for now.
> How do you plan to address the above use-case?
Actually, the getusermedia.html document doesn't cover use cases at all,
so the fact that your use case is not covered is not a surprise.
The section you point to is trying to illustrate the model of
constraints, including some of the interactions with remote entities,
but is not trying to be a description of all possible use cases.
The W3C specification only deals with browsers. If you want to implement
your recorder in a browser, that's relevant (but I have problems seeing
how it brings any new API requirements).
The following two documents are of interest to your use case:
- draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements
- draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview
In particular, from the latter:
The protocol specification does not assume that all implementations
implement this API; it is not intended to be necessary for
interoperation to know whether the entity one is communicating with
is a browser or another device implementing this specification.
Thus, if your automated peer implements the protocols but not the APIs,
it can do anything it wants with the incoming packets.
Were you looking for a browser-based recorder or for a non-browser-based
recorder?
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2013 11:28:36 UTC