W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > October 2013

Re: Proposal related to bug 22270 "Adding tracks to MediaStream should only be possible for constructed streams"

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 11:21:48 +0200
Message-ID: <526A382C.7090006@ericsson.com>
To: <robert@ocallahan.org>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
CC: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org> 
On 2013-10-25 09:40, Robert O'Callahan wrote:
> Alternative A seems a bit more straightforward. However, I would call
> ConstructedMediaStream just "MediaStream" since JS authors usually only
> have to use interface names when they're calling constructors.

I vote for A as well.

Regarding the names, I would like to call the simplest type MediaStream. 
It defines the minimum requirements for being a MediaStream, but at the 
same time it is a "complete" type that you could have an instance of (in 
future APIs). All the others are variants that adds some special 
functionality; like the ability to be constructed.

/Adam
Received on Friday, 25 October 2013 09:22:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:20 UTC