- From: guidou via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 13:35:16 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> > 1. A native implementation of a sink may send them if it makes sense, but it is not required to. > > I fear this is a recipe for interop issues and bad portability of the same web page/various browsers or various platforms. > Some web pages may for instance expect some signals that will not be provided by some UAs/platforms. > > For instance, it is not clear when web pages should expect "request-frame" or when implementations should send this signal. > If "request-frame" can safely be ignored, why introducing it? > Safely ignored means in this context that correctness would not be affected by ignoring a signal. Handling the signal might result in better performance by the sink. > That does not mean it is a bad idea to expose such signals. > To make progress there, I think we should try to first more precisely define sink and source models than what mediacapture-main is defining. This is not a simple exercise though since browsers might have different understanding and implementations. > By doing this exercise, we should be able to get consistent support across browsers. I agree that having a more precise definition of sinks and sources would be a good idea in general and would specifically help define a signaling mechanism. -- GitHub Notification of comment by guidou Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-transform/issues/24#issuecomment-852129674 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 1 June 2021 13:36:11 UTC