W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > April 2014

Re: WebIDL-compatible syntax compromise

From: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 11:38:57 -0400
Message-ID: <533C2F11.7000106@gmail.com>
To: public-media-capture@w3.org
Harald,
   the advanced constraints apply _before_ the non-required 
constraints.  The non-required constraints always apply last (they have 
to, since the results are somewhat non-deterministic.)

On 4/2/2014 11:28 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 04/02/2014 05:03 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
>> On 4/2/14 7:48 AM, Dan Burnett wrote:
>>> Regarding examples, it will probably be useful to show increasing
>>> complexity, i.e.,
>>> - an example with only non-required constraints
>>> - one with required and non-required constraints
>>> - one with required and advanced constraints
>>> - one with all 3 kinds
>> Agree, but lets start with the least complex of all:
>>
>> - an example with only audio:true and/or video:true
>> - an example with only non-required constraints
>> - one with required and non-required constraints
>> - one with required and advanced constraints
>>
>> I would end on advanced constraints and leave out the esoteric "one
>> with all 3 kinds" example. The fact that it works (and how) I think
>> matters mostly to implementers rather than users, and seems clear
>> enough in the current prose for those who truly desire to experiment.
> As I understand the proposal, one would use "advanced" constraints only
> when one wanted to give further guidance to the browser after the
> required and non-required constraints had been applied - so it would be
> natural for the last example to have more than just "advanced" - the
> typical "I must have a size in this range but would really prefer that
> size" example could be expressed as
>
> constraints = {
>     required: "width",
>     width: {min: 230, max: 1024},
>     advanced: [{width: 640}]
> }
>
> BTW: I don't like the name "advanced" (what do we do if we need
> something even more complex) - perhaps we could call it "refinements"?
>
> constraints = {
>     width: {min: 230, max: 1024},
>     refinements: [{width: 640}]
> }
>
>
>

-- 
Jim Barnett
Genesys
Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2014 15:39:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:25 UTC