W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > February 2014

Re: active speaker information in mixed streams

From: Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:07:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOqqYVFwJEJe35LN0ajzRgq2NwKxkKYgFR=BUs28uwAxhTPCPg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:55 PM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:

> 2014-02-07 14:54 GMT+01:00 Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>:
> > 1) It is only needed when talking to devices that use CSRC mapping. This
> > is a property set that belongs to the peerconnection abstraction
> > (probably on the receiving doohickey), not to the more generic
> > MediaStram connection.
>
> If that "event" (or whatever) belongs to PeerConnection then the
> reference to the MediaStream and/or MediaStreamTrack should also be
> provided by the callback, so we end in the same case. The problem here
> (IMHO) is having all the stuff on a single object (PeerConnection). Of
> course I don't want to expose WebRTC related stuff into
> MediaStream(Track), but adding everything on top of PC is not the
> proper way to go (IMHO).
>
>
Yes, that's why I want it to be on the RTPReceiver object.
We already have one of those per MediaStreamTrack.


>
>
> > 2) If this is going to be useful for active speaker switch indication,
> > the notification has to happen on a sub-second basis - too fast for a
> > reasonable periodic event.
>
> It could be relaxed/limited by the spec (i.e. just fire every 0.5
> seconds). I don't get how a JS periodic timer can be better, but maybe
> I am wrong.
>

Try it and see.... my instinct is that events in JS have a bit more
overhead than a callback.
I could be wrong.



>
>
> Best regards.
>
>
>
> --
> Iñaki Baz Castillo
> <ibc@aliax.net>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 23:08:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:38 UTC