- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:53:35 -0800
- To: Chris Wendt <chris-w3c@chriswendt.net>
- Cc: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, "public-orca@w3.org" <public-orca@w3.org>
On 19 February 2014 07:15, Chris Wendt <chris-w3c@chriswendt.net> wrote:
> I don’t believe there shouldn’t be aspirations of having a priority or
> frame-rate vs quality parameters meaning anything explicit, with any
> expected outcome other than a “preference" that guides the underlying
> implementation to “try" to conform to.
That's a reasonable starting point. If this were:
priority: 0.5, // give half the resources of something with priority 1
preferences: {
scale: 1, // don't downsample if you please
framerate: 30, // keep the frame rate here
quality: // I have no idea what metric we should be using here
// (0..1 where 0 = 0 bits and 1 = all the bits?)
}
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 17:54:02 UTC