W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2013

Re: gUM's optional constraints algorithm penalizes user-choice chasing best-match for webpage

From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:12:24 -0400
Message-ID: <52224018.7090301@mozilla.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 8/31/13 1:26 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 31 August 2013 00:43, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> The reason this works is that our (unchanged) core "remove-from-list"
>> algorithm ignores zero-reducing optional constraints, which makes it more
>> lenient the smaller the starting set is.
> I'd go even further and not remove anything that is marked with an
> optional constraint.  I'd use optional constraints to select a
> default, and maybe to order sources.

We could make further changes but I worry it wont generalize to all 
constraints the way this relatively minor change does.

I also don't think we need to go further because what I'm proposing 
achieves the same thing with less upset: By running discarded sources 
through a second time individually, we get additional valid sources that 
are less desirable than the finalSet, yet more desirable than the user 
saying no.

A UI selector may then use this information to emphasize (make default, 
sort etc.) desirable sources before less desirable sources.

> But I'm still a constraint-skeptic.  Feel free to ignore me, I'm
> clearly not in the consensus on this one.

.: Jan-Ivar :.
Received on Saturday, 31 August 2013 19:12:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:35 UTC