- From: Rich Tibbett <richt@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 13:03:26 +0200
- To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- CC: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, Alissa Cooper <acooper@cdt.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Francois Daoust wrote: > On 07/25/2011 07:39 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: >> What was agreed between DAP and webrtc (my interpretation) was that >> DAP should deal with capture to a file (meaning images _as well as_ >> audio or video). In other words non-real-time (~100ms range as >> discussed in webrtc). Correct. [1] is about pre-recording some content via UA dialogs and providing that to a web page in file form e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1XqvLOi-3I Hopefully we'll be nixing the Media Capture API [2]. IMO this is legacy since this work was picked up and extended to accommodate P2P scenarios by the WHATWG and WebRTC groups. > > In short: right now, DAP is looking at Web RTC to keep the "record" > method, so we should get back to DAP if we decide not to handle it. Correct and as this is already a feature of the WHATWG proposal [2] so it should stay in the WebRTC scope. > Still images from a camera are not being handled by anyone, as far as I > can tell. AFAICS it will be possible to assign a Stream object to a <video> and then copy content from that <video> to a <canvas> and then use getImageData against that <canvas> to obtain a still image/snapshot from the original Stream object. So still image capture is handled implicitly in the web toolchain and does not need special consideration in either group (unless we end up not being able to use that toolchain for whatever reason in the final API..). - Rich [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html-media-capture/ [2] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/complete/video-conferencing-and-peer-to-peer-communication.html#dom-mediastream-record [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/media-capture-api/
Received on Monday, 15 August 2011 11:04:14 UTC