- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 14:11:09 +0100
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5326F46D.60904@alvestrand.no>
On 03/17/2014 05:01 AM, Kiran Kumar wrote:
> Thank you steev,
> Please let me know if any one is opposing this to add to bug list....
If it's not obvious, I have stated that I oppose it - I don't see that
it is a necessary requirement, and I see it as increasing complexity.
So we're 1-1 in commenters.
>
> Thanks,
> Kiran.
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Steev James <steev.a.james@gmail.com
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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>
> <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>
> <mailto: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>
> <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>
> <mailto: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>
> <mailto:g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
> <mailto: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, Iņaki Baz Castillo
> >>> <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>
> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 2014-03-10 6:51 GMT+01:00 Kiran Kumar
> <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com
> <mailto:g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
> >>> <mailto:g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
> <mailto: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".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- Iņaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net
> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>
> <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 17 March 2014 13:12:01 UTC