Re: Media Capture Depth Stream Extension - call for review

I like the direction you are going with this … few small comments

I think the term "range" would be better than "depth" as that is what is used in lots of other contexts.

For cameras that do do this based on triangulation (either laser or stereo), you end up with really bad fidelity in some cases when you use integers because the values tend to linearly related with inverse of distance. At the browser API level, I think this would work best if the values were float in point numbers - preferable representing range in meters. If integers are used, it gets complicated on how to map them and depends on actually distance. So I strongly support the proposal in the issues section to use FLOAT in meters. 

Imagine a stereo camera that gives me a left and right camera plus a range image. So a call to getUseMedia might return two  video tracks plus a range track. I think we need to say something about the range image is registered to the left or right camera. Probably just saying that the first range track is registered to whatever the first video track is would do. Am I making any sense here or do I need to explain this better ?





On Mar 12, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Kostiainen, Anssi <anssi.kostiainen@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> A while ago we pinged the group [1] to review the initial set of use cases and requirements [2] for the Media Capture Depth Stream Extension layered on top of the getUserMedia API. We got good feedback and +1s from the group participants (thanks!).
> 
> Given the interest, we've now incorporated the feedback from the group, refined the use cases and requirements accordingly, and drafted a concrete proposal for the spec extensions [3] addressing the requirements. We also included a bunch of concrete examples [4] we think demonstrate the common real-world usage scenarios.
> 
> Now we’d like to ask the group to review the proposed spec extensions [3] (you may want to use [4] as a supplementary material). If we hear no concerns from the group on the general direction, we'll start drafting an Editor’s Draft based on the current proposal, so your feedback at this point is much appreciated.
> 
> As discussed earlier in the group, this work would happen in its own extension spec, following the established practice [5].
> 
> Looking forward to your feedback, and thanks for your contributions and interest so far.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Anssi
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2014Jan/0039.html
> [2] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Media_Capture_Depth_Stream_Extension#Use_Cases
> [3] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Media_Capture_Depth_Stream_Extension#Spec_Extensions
> [4] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Media_Capture_Depth_Stream_Extension#Examples
> [5] http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ExtensionSpecifications
>

Received on Thursday, 13 March 2014 14:59:04 UTC