- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:20:38 +0200
- To: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 2014-08-18 16:51, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote: > On 7/9/14 4:04 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: >> I'd really like to see some more input on this one. Or should we just >> leave it up to the Editors to decide? >> >> Stefan >> >> On 2014-07-07 14:32, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: >>> Since day one of WebRTC (this was before we spun off the local media >>> things into a TF) the way to get access to camera and microphone has >>> been: >>> >>> navigator.getUserMedia(....); >>> >>> from the spec version of June 19th [1] it is also possible to do >>> >>> navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia(....); >>> >>> Shijun filed a bug on that we should keep one way (not both) [2]. >>> >>> The comments so far seem to indicate that while >>> navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia is more logical we should only keep >>> the old navigator.getUserMedia method since many apps are using it. But >>> there has also been the comment that this is behind vendor prefix so >>> changing does not have that big consequences > > Sorry for the later response.At this point, who is going to change their > code from: > > navigator.mozGetUserMedia(... > and/ornavigator.webkitGetUserMedia( ... > > to: > navigator.getUserMedia(... > > rather than: > navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia(... > > and why should we help them? > >>> (and perhaps implementations could support the old prefixed way >>> for a long time even if the spec changes). > > Makes sense to me. > >>> I'd like some more discussion, and a conclusion. What should the spec >>> say? > > I think the spec should say navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia This matches my view on the subject. /Adam
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2014 06:21:05 UTC