- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 18:03:02 +0200
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
This is the "getting into the tracker" version of what I posted on the list earlier. I'd particularly like to see if we should pick up the idea from the DAP proposal of having a string array as a member of the Navigator object listing the things one can ask for permission to access. On 09/02/2013 05:24 PM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23128 > > Bug ID: 23128 > Summary: Add an explicit "get access to media" call > Classification: Unclassified > Product: WebRTC Working Group > VersSandnesion: unspecified > Hardware: PC > OS: Linux > Status: NEW > Severity: normal > Priority: P2 > Component: Media Capture and Streams > Assignee: public-media-capture@w3.org > Reporter: harald@alvestrand.no > CC: public-media-capture@w3.org > > One of the problems with the current method of getting access to media > is that it occurs as a side effect of a call done for other purposes > (GetUserMedia). > > The parameters for this aren't ideal to determine the full range of > permissions that a page would want - for instance, a page might first > open a video device, and later open an audio device separately; in our > current models, that would give 2 permissions prompts. > > Instead of doing it this way, we could make an explicit call: > > void GetMediaPermissions(Permissions permissions, > successCallback, errorCallback) > > Permissions = enum( > "videoInputDevices", > "audioInputDevices", > // and maybe extend this to > "deviceEnumeration", > "screenCapture", > "windowCapture", > .... > ) > > The UA could then use the list of permissions requested to construct an > appropriate UI element for asking permission from the user (or use a > stored permissions model to grant access immediately, if that's the > Right Thing). > In any case, all programs that know what class of permissions they want > can get those permissions with one call, one prompt, no matter what they > do later. > > For backwards compatibility, getUserMedia would be documented to have an > implicit call to GetMediaPermissions "behind the curtains". > > An earlier attempt was http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/perms/FeaturePermissions.html > - an important difference between that and this proposal is that this proposal > explicitly states that one can ask for a set of features, not just one at a > time, and that user prompts (and therefore reasonably long delays) are to be > expected. >
Received on Monday, 2 September 2013 16:03:31 UTC