- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 10:07:35 +0200
- To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 2012-08-04 14:59, Stefan Hakansson LK wrote: > On 08/04/2012 02:01 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> (wearing my co-Chair hat) >> I've discussed this with several people at the IETF meeting. Unless >> someone raises an objection, the chairs will instruct the editors to >> make this change. > (As individual): I proposed back in 2011 that DTMF should be constrained > to PeerConnection (as it really makes no sense for MediaStreamTracks in > general), so I'm for changing it along what is proposed here. Stefan >> >> On 08/03/2012 04:57 PM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: >>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18485 >>> >>> Summary: Change DTMF API to be on PeerConnection >>> Product: WebRTC Working Group >>> Version: unspecified >>> Platform: PC >>> OS/Version: Linux >>> Status: NEW >>> Severity: normal >>> Priority: P2 >>> Component: WebRTC API >>> AssignedTo: public-webrtc@w3.org >>> ReportedBy: harald@alvestrand.no >>> CC: public-webrtc@w3.org >>> >>> >>> Implementing the proposed DTMF API has turned out to be surprisingly complex >>> compared to the importance of the feature; the typing requirements for >>> MediaStream seem to be heavily complicated by it. >>> >>> Tommy Widenflycht has suggested instead that we define calls to make available: >>> >>> pc.canSendDTMF(MediaStreamTrack) >>> pc.sendDTMF(MediaStreamTrack, tones, duration) >>> >>> This has no impact on the definition of MediaStream and allows implementation >>> of sendDTMF without touching anything but PeerConnection. I'm all for a change in this direction as well. /Adam
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2012 08:08:05 UTC