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

Re: Update of Doohickey/AddTrack proposal

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 23:10:21 +0100
Message-ID: <52B36ECD.3040108@alvestrand.no>
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 12/19/2013 07:40 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 19 December 2013 10:30, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
>> Agreed. I was thinking that the stream could be obtained from the track,
>> which pushes this somewhat upstream to the MediaStream spec.
> Yeah, that doesn't really work.  Besides creating a circular
> reference, a track can be part of multiple streams.  Learning all of
> them would suck a little.
>
Well, on the outgoing end, either you tell the PC explicitly what 
streams to teach the remote end about (AddStream), or you let the PC 
figure it out (AddTrack with implicit addition of all streams it's a 
member of). I don't see a third option (unless you're suggesting that 
the app needs to call *both* AddStream and AddTrack).

I don't see a huge cost in transmitting the info on all the streams a 
track is a member of, and I don't see a huge cost at the receiving side 
in being able to know about some MediaStream objects that it otherwise 
has no use for.

But this kind of illustrates my point from Seattle/Shenzen that when we 
change the PC model from stream to track, there is going to be a certain 
amount of effort involved in adjusting everything until it fits the new 
model.

We did not get all the points clear in Seattle/Shenzen.
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2013 22:10:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:37 UTC