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

Re: [Bug 25298] How to represent VideoFacingMode if browser is not able to detect the FacingMode of the camera.

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 22:42:29 +0200
To: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>,public-media-capture@w3.org
Message-ID: <155e3976-3528-4905-9b94-515687f4a46c@email.android.com>
I thought you had concluded that an enum inside a dict would not throw? Assignment rule rather than parameter rule?

On 28. april 2014 20:53:20 CEST, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:
>On 4/28/14 11:08 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> WRT the "default" notation: I'm unhappy with the idea of depending on
>
>> a proposed feature of WebIDL that last had activity on the bug in 
>> 2012. That doesn't seem like it's a recipe for getting things done
>here.
>
>I agree it doesn't actually block us from deciding here, so I shouldn't
>
>have made it a blocker. Apologies.
>
>I propose we open two new bugs:
>
> 1. "make facingMode a DOMString for now to avoid throwing on future
>    facingModes", and
> 2. "make facingMode a VideoFacingModeEnum again once default notation
>    is supported".
>
>and have the second one block on Bug 19936 
><https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19936>. At that time 
>we'd need to decide on "other".
>
>I'm happy to open these if that's ok.
>
>This is, unless we're ok with facingMode throwing on unknown values, in
>
>which case we don't have to do anything.
>
>
>> - When reporting settings, one wants to report "something that is not
>
>> any of the defined states". It is a good question if there needs to
>be 
>> a difference between "none of the above" and "I don't know" (in the 
>> latter case, the camera *might* be pointing at "user" or
>"environment" 
>> - but the browser doesn't know; in the former case, one would assume 
>> that the browser knows it doesn't.)
>
>Thanks for clarifying that "other" and "unknown" are different.
>
>> My instinctive reaction is to go for the simplest solution:
>>
>> - "none of the above" can't be expressed as a constraint. It's not 
>> important enough to complexify things.
>> - We allow only expression of the "I don't know" semantic of a state,
>
>> and represent it by not returning this value in the output of 
>> getSettings().
>>
>> Both of which need a sentence in the spec, but neither of which 
>> changes the WebIDL, I think.
>>
>> What do people think?
>
>I agree with undefined=unknown, and we can certainly defer deciding on 
>"other".
>
>But I'm curious what people think about UAs throwing on unknown 
>facingMode enum-values, as this would most likely preclude us from ever
>
>adding new facingModes in the future (except perhaps as a differently 
>named constraint, e.g. facingMode2, for backwards compatibilty, which
>is 
>quite ugly).
>
>.: Jan-Ivar :.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Received on Monday, 28 April 2014 20:43:07 UTC

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