W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > January 2012

Re: Do we need capabilities?

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 14:35:40 +0100
Message-ID: <4F1EB3AC.9060104@ericsson.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
CC: Neil Stratford <nstratford@voxeo.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 01/24/2012 01:26 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 01/24/2012 10:18 AM, Neil Stratford wrote:
>> On 24/01/2012 03:04, Anant Narayanan wrote:
>>> (Starting as a separate thread, to document objections to
>>> getCapabilities)
>>> 1. I think we can all agree that exposing capabilities without user
>>> consent of any form is not what we really want. If the current
>>> getCapabilities() is able to be invoked by any web page without any
>>> indication to the user, it is a massive privacy invasion. Ad services
>>> will then be able to add more bits of reliable information in order
>>> to personally identify visitors (they already know too much!).
>> I agree, getCapabilities() does require user approval, which could
>> also be used to pre-approve access for a later getUserMeida() request.
> Hmm..... perhaps this is a place where we can recast the language of
> discourse....
> if getCapabilities() did what getUserMedia() does now, and takes
> parameters saying what kind of stuff it wants (audio&  video), and the
> user dialog gives the user the chance to select which units it wishes to
> expose to this application, then getUserMedia() can select freely from
> the devices to which it has been permitted access, and can explore the
> properties of devices without disturbing the user further....?

What would be the difference to simply calling getUserMedia() as it's 
specified today and then remove all the tracks you don't need?

Received on Tuesday, 24 January 2012 13:41:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:17:25 UTC