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

Re: Proposed new text for noaccess

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 13:08:09 +0100
Message-ID: <526E53A9.5090904@alvestrand.no>
To: public-media-capture@w3.org
On 10/28/2013 07:50 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote:
> On 2013-10-27 22:02, Martin Thomson wrote:
>> On 26 October 2013 15:25, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
>> wrote:
>>> I would actually prefer an error callback or an exception - the
>>> programmer made an error, the application should do something
>>> exceptional.
>> The problem is that this ISN'T an error, it's just part of the normal
>> business of writing the app.
>> I WANT to have the stream added and negotiated, because - failing some
>> sort of circumstances out of my control - I expect the user to grant
>> permission really soon now.  And I want to ensure that, when they do,
>> the session can actually proceed.

This is an important consideration: Whether a track's access provisions
can be changed after creation.

If it can be changed (especially if the constraint can be removed and
replaced), I have issues.

> Is this one intended use-case of "no-access" tracks? I thought we had
> constructable tracks (without initial source) for this.

At the moment, we don't have a complete proposal that makes
constructable tracks usable.

Until we have that, I don't want to argue from that basis.

Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Monday, 28 October 2013 12:08:44 UTC

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