- From: youennf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2020 15:42:01 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
We are deviating somehow from the initial issue, but I cannot resist... some answers inline. > This is a perfect example of why we defined the constraints algorithm in the first place. The constraints algorithm tried to support a very high level of expressiveness and implementations fail to deliver. Most of the constraints do not really help the user select the right device. > What matters is not that I can intuit every corner case, but that it works the same in all browsers. Predictability trumps usefulness at the edges. I partially agree. If the design was providing a lot of benefits on real use cases at the cost of complexity or being counterintuitive in edge cases, this would be fine. Do you think this is the case? The only hypothetical benefit I can see would be if we would be able to get rid off of enumerating all microphones and cameras, which we are very far from being able to do. A tree-based approach for device selection seems more natural and would be much simpler. > I think evidence of poor web compat points to browsers _not_ following the algorithm. The spec should first define a precise and unambiguous algorithm. This is not yet the case. Here are some examples: * Wording with regards to device selection is full of MAY: 'The User Agent MAY use the value of the computed "fitness distance" from the SelectSettings algorithm, or any other internally-available information about the devices, as an input to the selection algorithm'. * Handling of default devices is loosely defined: 'User Agents are encouraged to default to using the user's primary or system default device for kind (when possible).' How is it expected to combine the fitness distance and the default device? * Wording with regards to settings selection is using SHOULD and MAY, not MUST: 'Select one settings dictionary from candidates, and return it as the result of the SelectSettings algorithm. The UA SHOULD use the one with the smallest fitness distance, as calculated in step 3, but MAY prefer ones with resizeMode set to "none" over "crop-and-scale". > I've been trying to get rid of `advanced` since forever. I'd be happy to reopen an issue on that if there's support for it. I support this. -- GitHub Notification of comment by youennf Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-image/issues/256#issuecomment-689646594 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2020 15:42:03 UTC