- From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:00:02 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> Again I ask, why is this a problem. Is encoded transform non-idiomatic? Encoded transform is bespoke. > Should we eliminate the RTCRtpScriptTransform constructor and introduce a new transferable object there to be used with postMessage, or make senders and receivers transferable? No, because unique tradeoffs were involved, and that [FPWD](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2021Sep/0000.html) has already shipped in two browsers. > Or is it a problem here, but not there? I believe it's on the person filing the issue to produce a convincing problem that needs fixing. Otherwise I see no new information since [FPWD](https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2022Feb/0024.html) that warrants revisiting the design of this API. Usage of the spec API seems fine, as seen in [this blog](https://blog.mozilla.org/webrtc/unbundling-mediastreamtrackprocessor-and-videotrackgenerator). -- GitHub Notification of comment by jan-ivar Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-transform/issues/113#issuecomment-2450990540 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2024 23:00:08 UTC