Re: Request for feedback: Streams API

I am not especially connnected to MediaStream/ WebRTC, so probably it's 
more efficient if Rob/Arthur do it.

I forward it to WebCrypto.

Right now there is still a list of bugs but regarding the current 
edition I would comment what I already said separately to Takeshi/Feras: 
I am not very convinced by the readExact method.

Regards

Aymeric

Le 04/12/2013 22:19, Rob Manson a écrit :
> Hi Feras/Takeshi,
>
> thanks for proactively dealing with all our feedback 8)
>
> I'll definitely see if there's any further feedback on the updated 
> spec from the people that participated at the FOMS session.
>
> And I'd also be happy to do the same with the Media Capture and 
> Streams TF/WG too as this relates directly to the post-processing use 
> cases I'm particularly interested in.
>
> roBman
>
>
> On 5/12/13 8:04 AM, Feras Moussa wrote:
>> Thanks Art.
>>
>> We've also had Rob (cc'd) interested from the FOMS (Open Media 
>> Standards) group. I'll follow up with Rob for further feedback from 
>> that group.
>>
>>
>> In the spec, we tried to capture all the various areas we think this 
>> spec can affect - this is the stream consumers/producers section 
>> (http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/streams-api/raw-file/tip/Overview.htm#producers-consumers)
>>
>> In addition to the ones you've outlined,the one that comes to mind 
>> from the list in the spec would be the web-crypto group.
>>
>> -Feras
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 12:57:50 -0500
>>> From: art.barstow@nokia.com
>>> To: feras.moussa@hotmail.com; domenic@domenicdenicola.com; 
>>> vitteaymeric@gmail.com
>>> CC: public-webapps@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: Request for feedback: Streams API
>>>
>>> Thanks for the update Feras.
>>>
>>> Re getting `wide review` of the latest [ED], which groups, lists and
>>> individuals should be asked to review the spec?
>>>
>>> In IRC just now, jgraham mentioned TC39, WHATWG and Domenic. Would
>>> someone please ask these two groups to review the latest ED?
>>>
>>> Aymeric - would you please ask the WebRTC list(s) to review the latest
>>> ED or provide the list name(s) and I'll ask them.
>>>
>>> -Thanks, ArtB
>>>
>>> [ED] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/streams-api/raw-file/tip/Overview.htm>
>>>
>>> On 12/4/13 11:27 AM, ext Feras Moussa wrote:
>>>> The editors of the Streams API have reached a milestone where we feel
>>>> many of the major issues that have been identified thus far are now
>>>> resolved and incorporated in the editors draft.
>>>>
>>>> The editors draft [1] has been heavily updated and reviewed the past
>>>> few weeks to address all concerns raised, including:
>>>> 1. Separation into two distinct types -ReadableByteStream and
>>>> WritableByteStream
>>>> 2. Explicit support for back pressure management
>>>> 3. Improvements to help with pipe( ) and flow-control management
>>>> 4. Updated spec text and diagrams for further clarifications
>>>>
>>>> There are still a set of bugs being tracked in bugzilla. We would like
>>>> others to please review the updated proposal, and provide any feedback
>>>> they may have (or file bugs).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> -Feras
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/streams-api/raw-file/tip/Overview.htm
>>>

-- 
Peersm : http://www.peersm.com
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms

Received on Thursday, 5 December 2013 08:45:30 UTC