- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 15:34:55 -0400
- To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>, Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 9/11/14 3:23 PM, cowwoc wrote:
> On 11/09/2014 3:21 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
>> Use { aspectRatio: { min: 16/9 - business_epsilon/2, max: 16/9 +
>> business_epsilon/2 } }
>
> Agreed, but then why have a built-in epsilon on top of the business
> epsilon?
I think we need some epsilon higher than [1] to ensure 16/9 equals
1920/1080 etc. on all platforms.
> This makes it hard for people to gauge what actual values they'll get.
> When I ask for a specific value, or a specific min/max I expect
> *exactly* those values (or a huge epsilon so I can't tell the
> difference).
With Cullen's approach precision seems ample, so I'm not sure there's a
problem here.
.: Jan-Ivar :.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_epsilon
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 19:35:28 UTC