- From: Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:14:17 -0400
- To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
- CC: public-orca <public-orca@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <523088C9.8070808@hookflash.com>
I read Martin's comments and that's not what I get at all from his comments. Maybe I misunderstand what he's saying though. As for Media Capture - I don't see how it perverts anything? Media Capture does not return that type of object and is unrelated. I don't like dtmf objects being needlessly referenced into the main object as it therefor cannot be ignored. It should be "yet another extension". This is really a specialized type of audio track in many ways. You can add a DTMF event handler even if it a separate object. You add the event handler to the dtmf media stream track object rather than the rtc connection. There's no issue or conflict. > Iñaki Baz Castillo <mailto:ibc@aliax.net> > 11 September, 2013 10:35 AM > 2013/9/11 Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com <mailto:robin@hookflash.com>> > > I like more the vision of Martin, in which DTMF is just an adicional > codec over an existing audio track (see mails below). Having a > specialized MediaStreamTrack was the previous attempt (before last > commit) in which we had RTCDTMFTrack. > > Now let's assume such an approach based on RTCDTMFTrack which is a > kind of MediaStreamTrack. This is problematic as we do not want to > pervert the MediaCapture MediaStreamTrack, do we? Do we want > MediaStream.getDtmfTracks() method? > > In our previous approach (before last commit) RTCDTMFTrack was not a > kind of MediaStreamTrack at all, but a class totally separated from > MediaCapture (this is, you cannot add a RTCDTMFTrack into a > MediaStream and so on). > > I strongly like the current approach in which DTMF is just a separate > codec within an audio track ("dtmf" codec) which means that the > RTCTrackDescription of an audio track includes an additional "dtmf" > codec (along with a "opus" or "g711" codec). > > > > There's absolutely no reason IMHO to have the DTMF object have any > methods in any of the core object. > > We need a way to add a DTMF hander. We can add a method to > RTCConnection (as we do now) or we can pervert the MediaCapture > MediaStream / MediaStreamTrack with this legacy and artificial stuff. > > We also need a way to receive DTMF. Yes, we could get rid of the > RTCConnection.onadddtmfhandler event, and instead force the user to > inspect the received RTCTrackDescription and, in case it is an audio > track with "dtmf" codec, then create a RTCDTMFHandler instance by > itself. I don't see too much benefit on that. > > > -- > Iñaki Baz Castillo > <ibc@aliax.net <mailto:ibc@aliax.net>>
Received on Wednesday, 11 September 2013 15:14:52 UTC