We can certainly look at this once the Streams API stabilizes. The plan is for MediaRecorder to lag behind Media Capture (a.k.a. getUserMedia). We're in a hurry to get gUM out, but there's not so much of a rush for MediaRecorder. - Jim From: groby@google.com [mailto:groby@google.com] On Behalf Of Rachel Blum Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 6:05 PM To: Robert O'Callahan Cc: Jim Barnett; public-media-capture@w3.org Subject: Re: MediaRecorder and using Streams Just to keep the list informed: Greg and I have summarized the pros/cons we can see around MediaRecorder using a Streams API. (attached) Agreeing with Robert though that we shouldn't block MediaRecorder on Streams stabilizing - but it seems an idea worth exploring. - rachel On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org<mailto:robert@ocallahan.org>> wrote: I think the basic idea makes sense but we can do it in addition to the Blob-only API, once the Streams situation has stabilized. I don't want to block MediaRecorder's streaming functionality on that. Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w
Received on Monday, 9 September 2013 22:18:47 UTC