- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2023 17:05:11 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> If we can get alignment on this being a control surface for target jitter buffer delay rather than "playout" then the the API would be more testable. I think that would be great! > desiredJitterBufferDelay I like this direction, though "delay" is still a measurement, which makes sense as a statistic, but as a control maybe we can apply something beneficial? `desiredJitterBufferDepth` or `desiredJitterBufferWindow`? Or why not lean into this difference and simply call it `receiver.jitterBufferDepth`? Gradual adherence is a feature, so I don't see why it should be confusing. > ... we want to update the video delay to also affect the jitter buffer rather than render timestamp Yes, inducing delay for reasons other than growing one's jitter buffer seems like a waste of time (literally). Even AV sync seems like we could come up with something that benefited both audio and video jitter buffers. -- GitHub Notification of comment by jan-ivar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-extensions/issues/12#issuecomment-1505623718 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2023 17:05:12 UTC