- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 15:01:36 +0100
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 2014-02-06 19:31, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 02/04/2014 02:13 PM, Adam Bergkvist wrote: >> Hi >> >> How should we proceed with this proposal? I don't think we will gain >> as much when it comes to simplicity if we just remove addStream(), but >> keep the concept of tracks belonging to a MediaStream when they are >> sent over an RTCPeerConnection (as Stefan argues in a branch of this >> thread). That was at least what I had in mind when I argued against >> addStream() in [1]. > > I think communicating the stream concept (which streams exist that have > this track as part of it) is important; if we don't communicate it, it's > impossible to reconstruct the streams on the receiving side. Just because *we* don't signal it, doesn't mean that such information can't be sent (if necessary for the app). Simple (and legacy compatible) apps would perhaps use a single stream for all incoming tracks, and multi MediaStream apps could signal a list of track id's that makes up a MediaStream. Which streams exist and what tracks they contain is subject to change. If that's something we want to reflect to the other side then that could involve a lot of signaling (that needs to be specified but could be made easier if it was app specific). /Adam
Received on Monday, 10 February 2014 14:02:02 UTC