- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 09:43:40 +0200
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- CC: <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 2013-10-10 09:01, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 10/08/2013 02:37 PM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22248 >> >> --- Comment #6 from Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com> --- >> Added text that when order is mentioned, it's the VideoTrackList that is >> referred to. >> >> Added text that talks about the translation from an unordered set to a >> ordered >> list. >> >> https://github.com/fluffy/webrtc-w3c/commit/8c3d0ad0700af97df5c6a6afdb76a6457c406252 >> >> > Last time we discussed this, I had a suggestion that the tracks should > be sorted in order of ID - which would make the order consistent, but > not useful. > > Given that we're adding tracks after initialization too, that may not be > very useful - having tracks change index at random can mess things up > for anyone who attempts to use the indexes. Now when you mention it, I remember your suggestion to sort by id. But as you say, it's probably better to keep the media element track lists as stable as possible once we've used the MediaStream's track set to initialize them the first time. People are better off using the ids (that are aligned between the two track types)" /Adam
Received on Thursday, 10 October 2013 07:44:05 UTC