- From: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 15:53:55 -0400
- To: public-media-capture@w3.org
Persistence until the page is closed (unless explicitly revoked) would be easy for users to understand. On 5/27/2014 3:33 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 05/26/2014 11:53 AM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22214 >> >> --- Comment #2 from Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> --- >> Discussed at Media TF meeting May 19. Consensus was not reached. >> > Follow-up on this one: > > It seems that we all agree that stored permissions are scoped per > origin, that stored permissions (and any other permissions) can be > revoked by the user at any time, and that whether permission is given > for one device, all devices, or some subset of them is entirely an UA > option. > > The discussion I heard at the Media Capture TF meeting was > approximately between two alternatives: > > 1) Permission persists until the device is released by all tracks > sourced from it. > > 2) Permission persists until the page is closed. (This may allow > permissions to survive a page reload.) > > The time (outside reload) when it makes a difference is if we have the > sequence: > > getUserMedia() -> stream (prompt happens) > stream.close() > > getUserMedia() -> stream2 > > Should the second call cause a prompt or not? > Note: If "all cameras" is the mode, the following code never causes a > second prompt in either scenario, I think: > > getUserMedia() -> stream1 > stream1.clone() -> stream2 > stream2.enable = false // to turn off the "capturing" indication > stream1.close() > > getUserMedia() -> stream3 // no prompt - camera access is still > permitted > > because stream2 functions as a "handle" to keep the permissions alive. > > I think I stated my preference at the meeting, but I would like to > hear from the rest - this should be settled one way or the other (or a > third...) > > > > > > -- Jim Barnett Genesys
Received on Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:54:34 UTC