- From: Neil Stratford <nstratford@voxeo.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:31:19 +0000
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 24/01/2012 14:57, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > I'm thinking about the uses cases here and let me try a straw man … > > If there is an aspect ratio, specified, meeting that constraint is the highest priority. > > If there is a max height or width set, meeting that constrain is the next highest priority. > > If there is a min height or width set, meeting that constraint is the lowest priority. > > All constraints being meant, select the solution with the largest number of pixels. > > > For the cases I could think of of being "realistic" use cases - these rules seemed to work. Thoughts on if something as simple of this would not work? different set of rules ? There may be cases that would require a different ordering of the priorities listed here. One example would be how to express a preference for the best quality picture, and all being equal with quality, I'd prefer landscape rather than portrait aspect ratio. With the fixed priority ordering described here I have the option of either forcing a landscape aspect, which may result in low quality, or asking for quality at the expense of giving up any preference for aspect. A potential solution may be to actually express the constraints as an ordered list - then I can express the preference for aspect ratio or quality in the order that I specify the parameters. Neil
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2012 11:31:50 UTC