W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > May 2014

Re: getCapabilities() as both static and object method?

From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 16:14:53 -0400
Message-ID: <537671BD.4030700@bbs.darktech.org>
To: public-media-capture@w3.org
On 16/05/2014 1:40 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>> Mandatory constraints let software probe without bothering the user
>> until there's something to bother the user about. If there's a
>> difference here, it's not this.
>>
>> Why did we invent a whole language to solve this prescriptively -
>> "Here's what I want" - to just ask "what do you have?"
> That argument doesn't contain enough detail for me to evaluate it.
>
> We've been living in the tension field between "I want to know so that I
> can decide before I ask" and "I want to state what I want and get the
> best you can do for me" for several years; the current state of play has
> some aspects from each side.
>
> To my mind, the questions we're debating aren't between black and white,
> it's between "somewhat darker" and "a little bit lighter".
>
> Much harder question.

The way I see, if the API lets you query device capabilities directly 
you can always layer a Javascript library on top which handles "I want 
to state what I want and get the best you can do for me". The opposite 
is not true. Meaning, there is no way to express all possible logic on 
top of a basic language that is inherently more restrictive.

To my understanding, the only reason we went down this road was to 
reduce fingerprinting. It was not to actually simplify the end-user's life.

Gili
Received on Friday, 16 May 2014 20:15:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:27 UTC