- 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