W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2011

Re: Clarification on media capture split between WebRTC and DAP

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:33:19 +0200
Message-ID: <4E2DB6EF.7050808@w3.org>
To: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
CC: Alissa Cooper <acooper@cdt.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 07/25/2011 07:39 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote:
> I think my previous answer was misleading. Sorry for that.
> 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). Webrtc should instead deal with streams (real-time). These streams could be streamed off the device, but could also stay on device (self-view, real-time analysis, , in combination with<canvas>  or the upcoming Audio APIs to do cool tricks of mixing different sources, ...).

DAP discussed Media Capture last week during its F2F. The general feeling was that the "record" method would be provided by the WebRTC working group for streams and that this would be enough, even though this would not encompass still images. There wasn't a huge support during the F2F to continue working on the Media Capture API [1]. They will monitor what gets done within the Web RTC Working Group.  I raised the concern that I wasn't sure the Web RTC WG would keep the "record" method.

Relevant minutes are at:
(well, I don't see trace of my concern in those minutes)

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. Still images from a camera are not being handled by anyone, as far as I can tell.


[1] http://dev.w3.org/2009/dap/camera/Overview-API

> So far (my interpretation of) what was agreed.
> In one of the API proposals you can now record a stream - this was never discussed between DAP and webrtc so there is no agreement for that!
> I think the chairs (i.e. me and Harald) need to bring this up with DAP again if we decide that recording should stay as a feature.
> Stefan
> ________________________________________
> From: Stefan Håkansson LK
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 4:03 PM
> To: Alissa Cooper; public-webrtc@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Clarification on media capture split between WebRTC and DAP
>> At the F2F I asked a question about how media capture functionality is being split between WebRTC and DAP. From the minutes:
>>>   Alissa: thinking about the use case where you may want to use the
>>>    camera to take still pictures but not to stream video
>>>    Stefan: coordination with DAP. We'll handle streams, they will
>>>    handle still pictures.
>>>    <burn>  actually, I think Alissa's concern was that this API might be
>>>    used to record but not stream
>> So just to clarify,
>> DAP is handling capture of still images
>> WebRTC is handling capture of audio, whether it is then streamed to another endpoint or not
>> WebRTC is handling capture of video, whether it is then streamed to another endpoint or not
>> Is that right?
> That is right, at least that's the way I interpret it.
> Also, we never really discussed recording in the webrtc context. In at least one of the API proposals recording is a supported feature, but it has not be discussed (and is not in the charter).
>> Thanks,
>> Alissa
Received on Monday, 25 July 2011 18:33:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:21 UTC