W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-orca@w3.org > February 2014

Re: A Big Proposal: A way to control quality/resolution/framreate/simulcast/layering with RtpSender

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:52:54 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnXbJZzkg_2f7pPxjGAv-CFD9ephqxMcngBcYRF7EThALg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Cc: Chris Wendt <chris-w3c@chriswendt.net>, "public-orca@w3.org" <public-orca@w3.org>
On 19 February 2014 15:44, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> wrote:
> I think we still need scale for simulcast and maxBitrate for cases where you
> want to constrain bandwidth even when it's available.    And priority vs.
> resources seems pretty similar.


I'd like to take simulcast out actually.  I think that aside from some
bindings necessary to get playback right, you can achieve simulcast
transmission (what we are talking about here) by having multiple
tracks with different resolution constraints.  I don't think that
means fewer options sadly.

Maybe we can also discuss minimums.  I don't think that it's
worthwhile having minimum values initially, and maybe not ever, though
I'm open to the idea.  And I think that it's a universally applicable
thing across all axes.  I can see cases for minimums on all three:
frame rate (sign language), resolution (1x1, my image recognition
can't deal), and quality (my eyes, ow, my eyes).
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 23:53:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:39:24 UTC