- From: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 09:06:35 -0400
- To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
- Cc: Dominique Hazaël-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
+1. The current constraints proposal satisfies a number of requirements that we have elaborated in repeated and extensive discussions. I'm strongly opposed to removing it. Jim > On Mar 22, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote: > > >> On Mar 21, 2014, at 8:47 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote: >> >> I think I might be convinced to switch to this new approach, if we work >> it out separately from the main getUserMedia spec; in other words, we >> would freeze (e.g. move to LC) the current getUserMedia without any >> constraints > > GUM does not meet it uses cases without this - I will be very strongly opposed to LC of any version of GUM where it is effectively useless for many of the important use cases. > > > > >
Received on Sunday, 23 March 2014 13:07:10 UTC