- From: youennf via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2023 09:17:35 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
One possibility would be to first define how to plug an encoder in the current pipeline.
We then extend the API for encoder to be considered as a source, via a simple boolean at construction time for instance.
This two stage process would allow us to:
1. Focus first on how to define encoder as a transform, its processing model, feedback API and so on.
2. Focus second on the interactions of encoder as a source (and not as a transform) with regards to track, setParameters and so on.
Here is a rough sketch of what it could be:
```
[Exposed=DedicatedWorker]
interface RTCRtpSenderEncoder {
constructor(boolean isSource)
readonly attribute RTCRtpSenderEncoderHandle handle;
readonly attribute ReadableStream? readable; // null if isSource is true.
readonly attribute WritableStream writable;
// Need congestion API, error API and so on.
};
[Exposed=(DedicatedWorker, Window),
Transferable]
interface RTCRtpSenderEncoderHandle {
readonly boolean attribute isSource;
}
partial interface RTCRtpSender {
readonly attribute RTCRtpSenderEncoderHandle? encoder;
}
```
--
GitHub Notification of comment by youennf
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-encoded-transform/issues/211#issuecomment-1844972816 using your GitHub account
--
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2023 09:17:38 UTC