Re: Capabilities vs SupportedConstraints from Martin Thomson on 2014-11-05 (public-media-capture@w3.org from November 2014)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:22:01 -0800
To: Rob Manson <robman@mob-labs.com>
Cc: "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWhiksgF_XRzn_0=kqOH4SWYVz8NtQzDMwPBujCRicp0Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 4 November 2014 15:40, Rob Manson <robman@mob-labs.com> wrote:
> Supported Constraints are the sub-set of Constraints that both the device
> AND the UA are able to understand and attempt to apply (this is not just the
> constraint-parsing table but also what the device drivers support).

I don't see how this can be implemented without restructuring the API
in a way that makes gUM less usable.

How about having "recognized constraints" instead, which is the set of
constraints that the UA knows about and will either a) reject if it
can't apply them for any reason, or b) apply them.

Received on Wednesday, 5 November 2014 23:22:29 UTC