- From: Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:31:40 +0530
- To: Steev James <steev.a.james@gmail.com>
- Cc: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGW1TF5S2Az9c3cwdpcuMUm+FvX0rhOAeCVRo9M7x0Z8r2Dfug@mail.gmail.com>
Thank you steev, Please let me know if any one is opposing this to add to bug list.... Thanks, Kiran. On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Steev James <steev.a.james@gmail.com>wrote: > Proposal seems to be fine for me. > +1 for adding defaultDevice to getMediaDevice. > > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Most of the folks are silent on this proposal... is that silence means >> supports or oppose... ? >> I welcome your inputs. >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Gili, >>> >>> AFAIK app will not have any control on selecting another device, in case >>> of unavailability of the selected device. >>> For example., If 3 devices are available and App is showing 1 as default >>> (according to its previous selection), 2 is the device selected by user, >>> and 3 is the default device according to browser platform. In this case if >>> user selects device-2 and if it is not available, then browser will get the >>> access for device-3 and not device-1 as shown by app. App will fail in this >>> case. >>> >>> Another scenario is, if the previously selected device is not available >>> in the list of devices (in case if that user moves from home to office >>> where he has used some external device etc .. ) App can not judge a default >>> device. >>> >>> If App is really willing to show the default as that corresponding to >>> previously selected one, then it can choose it with default selection but >>> highlight the browser specified default device to indicate that the >>> highlighted device will be selected in case of unavailability of selected >>> device. (Since this specification does not have any control on app >>> implementations, this is just my suggestion as one way for implementing >>> App). >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 11:50 AM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>wrote: >>> >>>> The concept of a "default" device without a context seems like a >>>> losing proposition. As Harald mentioned, there is no objective "default" >>>> when choosing between front and back cameras on a phone. I suggest that the >>>> "default device" should really corresponds to the last selected device in >>>> some application-defined context. Meaning, applications will probably want >>>> to default to the last device used and expect different "defaults" >>>> depending on the context (e.g. microphone plugged in, or not). >>>> >>>> Gili >>>> >>>> >>>> On 14/03/2014 1:11 AM, Kiran Kumar wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:34 AM, Harald Alvestrand >>>> > <harald@alvestrand.no <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no><harald@alvestrand.no>> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > On 03/13/2014 01:32 PM, Kiran Kumar wrote: >>>> >> Dear Harald, Please find my comments inline. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Harald Alvestrand >>>> >> <harald@alvestrand.no <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no><harald@alvestrand.no>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> On 03/12/2014 12:32 PM, Kiran Kumar wrote: >>>> >>> Hi, I would like to add this to bug list. Please let me know if >>>> >>> you have any comments. >>>> >> >>>> >> I would like to not add it. >>>> >> >>>> >> As has been noted, there isn't always an obvious default device. So >>>> >> if the flag is added, the JS must be written to handle the >>>> >> condition where no default device is in the list. But since this >>>> >> may be a rare case, JS apps might choose to ignore this possibility >>>> >> - which is bad for app portability. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> [Kiran] It is not obvious to have a defaultDevice but most of the >>>> >> mobile devices have default devices like front camera or back >>>> >> camera... Any new thing will increase the processing, but I don't >>>> >> agree addition of this attribute will result in too much complexity >>>> >> for checking. Generally most of the devices have a single device. >>>> > >>>> > Actually you illustrate my point. Which of the front and back cameras >>>> > on my phone is the "default" camera? >>>> > >>>> > *[Kiran]* This attribute helps in determining that. >>>> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Also, the moment you plug a Bluetooth or USB headset into a device, >>>> > it has multiple audio devices. I think the theory that most devices >>>> > have a single device (of each type) is a weak one. >>>> > >>>> > *[Kiran]* Agreed. >>>> >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> If the JS wishes to get a device, and it doesn't care about which >>>> >> one, it could just getUserMedia(). Which one is returned may vary >>>> >> depending on configuration parameters, constraints, or whether some >>>> >> other program has opened the device (for OSes that do exclusive >>>> >> device access). >>>> >> >>>> >> [Kiran] This will be helpful to give the judgement to user, >>>> >> ofcourse getMediaDevices() itself is meant for that. But in some >>>> >> applications, we can have a use case like if the selected device is >>>> >> not available, then go for the default device, instead of resulting >>>> >> in error. >>>> >> >>>> >> [Kiran] For example, my laptop is having a built-in-camera, when I >>>> >> want to chat with my friend, I will attache a webcam that supports >>>> >> high definition/ with higher pixel number. I prefer to access the >>>> >> external webcam attached, but if I am not able to access that in >>>> >> any case, instead of resulting in failure it will select the >>>> >> default built-in-camera. >>>> > >>>> > That's how it's supposed to work if you give the ID of your attached >>>> > webcam as an optional constraint: If it's not available, you'll get >>>> > another one. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > *[Kiran]* If the devices is enabled with 3 devices, as you specified >>>> >>>> > above like through Bluetooth or any other means, and if the device >>>> > selected by user is not available, then out of the 2 remaining >>>> > devices, how the user can come to know which one it will be selected >>>> > by default ? >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> The only use case I can see is to preselect the default device in a >>>> >> list of devices, so that the user can tell which device will be >>>> >> opened if he doesn't select one - and as seen above, this is not >>>> >> guaranteed to be the device that actually gets selected (some other >>>> >> program may have grabbed it before the user selects a device). >>>> >> >>>> >> [Kiran] I agree. >>>> >> >>>> >> I see increased complexity, without a corresponding size of >>>> >> benefit. So I'd like to not do this. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> [Kiran] I see more benefit as I explained in the above example. >>>> >> What do you say .... >>>> > >>>> > *[Kiran] *I can say one more use case here, that instead of just >>>> >>>> > default selection. 1. An app can provide the default selection for >>>> > the high resolution camera or sophisticated mic and highlight the >>>> > default devices, so that if the selected device is not available, >>>> > then highlighted device will be selected. 2. If user selects a third >>>> > device instead of default selected device and the platform default >>>> > device, then in case of in-availability of selected device, it should >>>> > select the default device. >>>> > >>>> > I'd like more opinions... >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Kiran Kumar >>>> >>> <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com <mailto:g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com><g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> It is not universally true for all, >>>> >>> >>>> >>> When I connect an external webcam to my desktop PC, which has no >>>> >>> camera, Mozilla is displaying its names as YUV-xxx-camera. >>>> >>> Laptops are also not showing "default" prefix in the names. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> I am not sure which devices/SO's are showing the "default" >>>> >>> prefix. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Thanks, Kiran. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo >>>> >>> <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net> <ibc@aliax.net>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> 2014-03-10 6:51 GMT+01:00 Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com >>>> >>> <mailto:g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com> <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>>: >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to propose adding a defaultDevice attribute which >>>> >>>> indicates which device is the default device out of the list. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> dictionary MediaDeviceInfo { DOMString deviceId; >>>> >>>> MediaDeviceKind kind; DOMString label; DOMString >>>> >>>> groupId; >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> bool defaultDevice; }; >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This will allow a default value checked while displaying the >>>> >>>> list of devices. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK the multimedia subsystem in >>>> >>> some SO's report a "default sound card", "default mic" and >>>> >>> "default webcam". >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net><ibc@aliax.net> >>>> > >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
Received on Monday, 17 March 2014 04:02:30 UTC