Re: Constraints 2014

The language for Constrainable and getUserMedia is not consistent in the 
current draft.  Constrainable uses ConstraintSets (which are objects) 
rather than individual KVPs - that's what the example is supposed to 
illustrate.  Leaving aside the missing commas,  the example I gave is 
valid for applyConstraints in the current draft, but not for 
getUserMedia.    We plan to update gUM to match the new definition in a 
future draft.

- Jim

On 3/24/2014 4:01 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
> On 3/24/14 1:52 PM, Jim Barnett wrote:
>> For an example of back-off of tied constraints:
>>
>> {
>>   "mandatory":  {...
>>   },
>>   "optional":  [{
>>     "aspectRatio":  15/6
>>     "width": 500
>>  },  {
>>      "aspectRatio": 4/3
>>       "width":  400
>>   }]
>> }
>
> I'm surprised. Missing commas aside, there's still text in the spec 
> that suggests this is not valid: 
> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#methods-3 says:
>> 5. For each constraint key-value pair in the "optional" sequence of 
>> the constraints that are for the current media type, in order,
>>     1. If the constraint is not supported by the browser, skip it and 
>> continue with the next constraint.
>
> Where does the spec spell out that multiple key-value pairs in each 
> optional array entry are now allowed?
>
> I suppose sequence<ConstraintSet>, but with ConstraintSet being 
> object... this is subtle to say the least.
>
> .: Jan-Ivar :.
>

-- 
Jim Barnett
Genesys