Re: Constructors and cloning

On 05/11/13 18:04, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 11/05/2013 06:47 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
>> On 2013-11-04 20:02, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> My alternate suggestion is to remove the constructor for
>>> MediaStreamTrack until we have a good story on how we want to use naked
>>> tracks; at the moment, no such compelling story has been told, as far as
>>> I can tell, so I'd want to call that a "post version 1" feature.
>>
>> We can skip the MediaStreamTrack(kind, Constraints) constructor for
>> now and only have a MediaStreamTrack(MediaStreamTrack) to make cloning
>> consistent with MediaStream(MediaStream) (if we decide to go that way).
>>
>>> I would also suggest that AudioStreamTrack and VideoStreamTrack be
>>> removed from the spec, since they now have no visible properties.
>>
>> That is my intention as well since removing the constructors from
>> these types would leave nothing at all.
>>
>>> Replacing MediaStream.clone() with a MediaStream(MediaStream)
>>> constructor doesn't matter to me - the difference seems to be syntax,
>>> not semantics.
>>
>> So then the MediaStream(MediaStream) would clone the provided stream
>> including its MediaStreamTracks.
>>
>> Should the MediaStream(sequence<MediaStreamTrack>) constructor clone
>> the provided tracks or just add them?
>
> I would say that it adds them, so that
>
> s = MediaStream((track))
>
> has the same result as
>
> s = MediaStream()
> s.AddTrack(track)
>
> I think it would be confusing to have these two different.

I agree.

>>
>> /Adam
>>
>>> On 11/04/2013 10:51 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> In the current spec, we have the following APIs to create new
>>>> instances of MediaStream and MediaStreamTrack:
>>>>
>>>> ------------
>>>> MediaStream() constructor
>>>>    - sequence<MediaStreamTrack>
>>>>    - MediaStream (used to clone the given stream, but behavior changed
>>>> (accidentally?) when we switched to explicit cloning of tracks)
>>>>
>>>> MediaStream.clone()
>>>>
>>>> AudioStreamTrack() constructor
>>>>    - Constraints
>>>>
>>>> VideoStreamTrack() constructor
>>>>    - Constraints
>>>>
>>>> MediaStreamTrack.clone()
>>>> ------------
>>>>
>>>> I belive the API surface we expose for this functionality is a whole
>>>> lot bigger than it would have to be. The Audio/VideoStreamTrack
>>>> interfaces are empty now when getSourceIds() have become getDevices()
>>>> on Navigator. I think we could get away with something like below:
>>>>
>>>> ------------
>>>> MediaStream() constructor
>>>>    - sequence<MediaStreamTrack> (add specified tracks to new stream)
>>>>    - MediaStream (clone given stream; including tracks)
>>>>
>>>> MediaStreamTrack() constructor
>>>>    - kind, Constraints (replaces constructors on derived types)
>>>>    - MediaStreamTrack (clone given track)
>>>> ------------
>>>>
>>>> /Adam
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2013 18:35:53 UTC