Re: [Bug 22594] noaccess / peerIdentity as constraints

Giri,

can you develop your thoughts a bit?

I have on the list proposed that much of the peerIdentity stuff should 
be moved to the WebRTC document, but if the UA would want to display a 
special dialogue with the gUM prompt ("the app asking for access to your 
camera will no be able to record the media, or be able to send to anyone 
else than identity-of-peer-user") it should be documented in this 
document I think.

Br,
Stefan

On 2014-02-20 17:47, Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:
> Sounds good.  I can file if you don't mind.
>
> Thanks,
> -Giri
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux [mailto:dom@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:46 AM
> To: Mandyam, Giridhar
> Cc: public-media-capture@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [Bug 22594] noaccess / peerIdentity as constraints
>
> Hi Giri,
>
> On jeu., 2014-02-20 at 16:34 +0000, Mandyam, Giridhar wrote:
>> I apologize, but we don't think this particular bug is fixed.  QuIC's
>> opinion is that all mention of peerIdentity should be removed from
>> this particular document.  We will not support this document going to
>> last call otherwise.
>
> The bug I had raised was specifically on the fact that peerIdentity/noaccess where not MediaStreamTrack-level constraint, which has now been fixed. I think the move of peerIdentity to the WebRTC document might deserve a separate bug for clarity sake.
>
> Dom
>
>

Received on Friday, 21 February 2014 12:20:45 UTC