On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:
> I’ve pretty much lost track of what you are proposing we do. You are
> proposing we just ask the browser for a stream, it gives us whatever it
> wants, and then the app uses the setting API to figure out what the browser
> provided ? Mostly I just care that I have some way of doing this but I
> agree with Roc that not having to loop over a trial / test type interface
> makes more sense to me.
>
I think you misread me there, or maybe I wasn't clear. Sorry. I favor
looping in the application if it means a simpler API.
Anyway, if a "request and check" interface is adequate for MediaRecorder,
then we simplify things by just providing it directly instead of
indirecting through the Constraints spec --- e.g. by providing direct
getters on MediaRecorder for MIME type and image size instead of
introducing a MediaRecorderSettings object.
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp
waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w