- From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:27:44 -0400
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 8/7/2012 11:32 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote: > On 2012-07-19 13:42, Stefan Hakansson LK wrote: >> I think I proposed at one time that DTMF should be echoed into the audio >> stream. I did that for two purposes: >> 1. It seems very strange to me to have an operation on an audio stream >> track that has no meaning outside the RTP transmission of a >> PeerConnection. What should happen if you have a MediaStream locally >> only, and do "insertDTMF"? >> 2. It would make local feedback simpler. At least on my phone, when I >> use DTMF (which may be sent over the network using DTMF events - I don't >> know really and don't care), tones are played locally as a feedback. I >> assume that many app developers would like the behavior, and if >> "insertDTMF", for a MediaStreamTrack that is connected to an audio >> element, did play out as tones you would have that feedback for free. >> (There are other ways to do it for sure, it is more nice-to-have). >> >> That were my reasoning. But if "insertDTMF" should only mean "transmit >> DTMF events", perhaps is should be an operation on PeerConnection >> instead. Could we do something like Harald proposed for stats: have >> something you can do on what is in localStreams? > > I think this is worth looking into. DTMF doesn't make sense in a local > only case so it would be nice to avoid having the DTMF API in the > MediaStream API and instead attach it to PeerConnection (e.g. > peerConn.sendDTFM(targetAudioTrack, dtmfData ...);). What about point 2? I.e. if I select "send a 5" in my UI, most users expect to hear feedback. It's not mandatory, but if we don't then developers will do it themselves via (unsynced, maybe un-echo-cancelled) audio elements. -- Randell Jesup randell-ietf@jesup.org
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 19:30:03 UTC