- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 18:18:56 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Gili, please don't use the bugzilla for asking questions or repeating your arguments. In the current specification, the "overconstrained" callback would be called if there was a mandatory constraint being violated - so you're using the word "optional" in a different way from the current spec. On 09/04/2013 03:03 PM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote: > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15861 > > --- Comment #9 from Gili <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> --- > (In reply to comment #7) >> The general mechanism you describe here is pretty much how our current >> constraint approach work (as far as I understand it). > One difference I note is the existence of mandatory constraints in the spec. > > Another thing I wanted to clarify, when given conflicting constraints > (resolution, frame-rate, bitrate) does the browser get to decide which gets > priority over the other or does it fail-fast and notify the callback > immediately that the constraints cannot be honored as-is? In my proposal, the > latter occurs. > > I'm trying to push as much of the decision-making out of the browser and into > the application's hand. >
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 16:19:24 UTC