- From: Elad Alon via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 20:53:24 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
We agree that exposing the regions on the track[*] would be ergonomic. `Exposure of all CropTargets on the track` would naturally co-exist with `produceCropTarget() returns CropTarget`. Therefore, exposing on the track becomes an additive improvement. **I suggest we leave it out of the MVP.** Avoiding scope-creep would make it easier to reach consensus. That we can add this later is especially true because `CropTarget` (which you call `MediaStreamTrackRegion`) is an opaque interface. This currently-opaque interface can be easily extended later with your suggestion of `origin` and `name`. (Modulo that it would raise some concerns if we wish to extend this mechanism for non-self-capture; please see my next comment.) I'll continue the discussion of the merits of expose-on-track in my next comment, but I hope we can agree that this is a non-blocking early discussion about later improvements? @youennf? @jan-ivar? --- [*] This refers back to issue #10, as we are now discussing yet another property to be exposed on tracks, and so the issue of irrelevant-exposure becomes more important. It strikes me as odd that when `getUserMedia` returns an audio track associated with the user's mic, `cropTo` and `regions` would be exposed on it. I think it's more ergonomic for developers if the controls are only exposed where they're relevant, and [developers rank higher than implementers and spec-authors](https://www.w3.org/TR/design-principles/#priority-of-constituencies). -- GitHub Notification of comment by eladalon1983 Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-region/issues/6#issuecomment-1021598365 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2022 20:53:26 UTC