Re: [Bug 26243] Do we need getUserMedia() on MediaDevices?

On 08/22/2014 08:24 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Although I'm empathetic to your attempts to clean up the API, I'd
> offer the advice that this probably is too well-established to
> advocate removal.  You could offer it additionally, but every bit of
> getUserMedia code, everywhere, will break with that change otherwise.

Actually adapter.js needs to change. Most other projects seem to pull
that one in.

(in fact adapter.js makes getusermedia a global function - so there's a
mass of code out there that doesn't even use the navigator. prefix....)

>
> It *is* easy to add the new location; the problem is that you need to
> make that change in every bit of code that's already out there.  I
> think it would be fine to map it additionally in to
> navigator.mediaDevices, but I don't think you're going to find browser
> vendors very excited to break current code in this way.  From my
> experience with Web Audio, there would be a lot of complaints.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Martin Thomson
> <martin.thomson@gmail.com <mailto:martin.thomson@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 22 August 2014 06:55, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org
>     <mailto:dom@w3.org>> wrote:
>     > While esthetically I can understand the change, I don't think
>     aesthetics
>     > have sufficient values to justify the cost of explaining to
>     thousands of
>     > developers that their existing
>     >   navigator.getUserMedia = navigator.webkitGetUserdia ||
>     > navigator.mozGetUserMedia;
>
>
>     The existing code looks like this:
>
>     navigator.getUserMedia = navigator.getUserMedia ||
>     navigator.webkitGetUserMedia || navigator.mozGetUserMedia;
>
>     But what about other browsers?  Don't they get their prefixes too?
>
>     And it's easy to change this hack to add the new location.
>
>     I think that users with prefixes in their code understand that their
>     code will be broken and are willing to update.  We can leave a shunt
>     in place at the prefix for some period, but I don't like the
>     implication that a half-considered/half-designed feature determines
>     the state of the browser in perpetuity.
>
>


-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.