- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 14:36:12 -0400
- To: bugzilla@jessica.w3.org, public-media-capture@w3.org
On 4/3/14 8:59 AM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25247 > > Bug ID: 25247 > Summary: getCapabilities needs to decide what scope(s) it's > available at > Product: WebRTC Working Group > Version: 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 > > It used to be that this text was what we intended to say: > > " The Capabilities dictionary specifies the subset of the constrainable > properties and values from the registry that the UA supports". (section 11.3) > > and that it was a static method. > Now it is a method on the track, and it is said that: > > "The getCapabilities() method returns the dictionary of the capabilities that > the object supports." (section 11.1.2). > > Obviously, if the latter is the only thing available, the example is flawed. I disagree it is flawed, as I mentioned in another thread, because someone is welcome to invent a camera that swivels. > If the former is going to be true, there will have to be a static method, or a > method on NavigatorUserMedia, that exposes the getCapabilities() accessor > there. And we can rename it getFingerprint(). > Which should it be? I assume it was removed from gUM for a reason. .: Jan-Ivar :.
Received on Thursday, 3 April 2014 18:36:35 UTC