- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 13:05:40 -0700
- To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
- Cc: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>, Tommy Widenflycht (ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ) <tommyw@google.com>, Victoria Kirst <vrk@google.com>
Yes, this is something that should be made asynchronous. While we are there, s/Infos/Info/ - "Info" is short for "Information", which is already plural. On 4 June 2013 11:36, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > This seems like a good idea. > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote: >> >> getSourceInfos is currently defined as synchronous [1] , but it will need >> to reach down into the media subsystem to enumerate capture devices. >> Previously, we have suggested that APIs like this should be async, to avoid >> blocking the JS thread while waiting for the low-level operation to >> complete. For getSourceInfos, I think this is still true - even if we >> pre-enumerate devices when the browser starts, it is possible that a page >> may make a request before the enumeration has completed, and will still need >> to block. >> >> Therefore I suggest that as part of the futures discussion, we consider >> whether getSourceInfos should be async, either >> >> void getSourceInfos(successCallback, failureCallback) >> >> or >> >> Future getSourceInfos() >> >> [1] http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#methods-1 >> >
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2013 20:06:08 UTC