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

Re: When the light goes on

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 06:14:53 +0000
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1CFFF721@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
On 2014-05-22 15:33, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 22 May 2014 05:57, Stefan Håkansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>>> Non-persistent grants of consent can be paused somehow.  We didn't
>>> agree on the precise control surface.  I have proposed the use of
>>> "MST.enabled" for this.  That causes the active indicator to disappear
>>> but the potential indicator remains.  For a non-persistent grant, only
>>> the track ending causes the indicia to disappear.
>> I fail to parse the above completely. Should the first "non-persistent
>> grant" say "persistent grant"?
> I meant non-persistent.

Ah, I think I got it then. In the last sentence saying "track ending 
causes the indicia to disappear" indicia refers to the potential indicator.

> The concern here is the scenario that Justin explained, and Shijun
> also pointed out a scenario with similar characteristics.
> Justin's scenario: An application gains non-persistent consent for
> access to a camera, but they want to temporarily suspend the stream.
> For instance, my calling app has a mute button.  If the active indicia
> were to remain, that would be bad.
> Shijun's scenario: An application with non-persistent consent is
> suspended.  For instance, on a mobile platform, the user switches
> between the browser application and another application.  The
> application is not receiving media because it's suspended.  An active
> indicator (the light) probably needs to be switched off in this
> scenario too.

This is right down to the "active indicator" part, but you then say "the 
light"; I think it was said several times that "the light" is out of 
control for the UA and that we'd have to rely on it doing the right thing.

>> And, for clarity, the active indicator would of course only disappear if
>> all MSTs that use the source are disabled.
> Absolutely.  The model to use here is that the track becomes
> temporarily disconnected from its source, which allows the source to
> transition to a dormant state if no tracks are using it.  This turns
> off any active indicator.


Received on Friday, 23 May 2014 06:15:18 UTC

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