W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > February 2016

Re: maxHeight and maxWidth

From: Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:26:47 -0500
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56C3B037.7060707@mozilla.com>
On 2/13/16 11:50 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
> ‚ÄčI hope we can all remember that we are only considering 
> scaleResolutionDownToHeight/Width for the encoding parameters *for 
> simulcast scenarios*.  If simulcast isn't part of the scenario, then 
> there's no need for these (or maxFramerate, or scaleResolutionDownBy, 
> etc).  And most app developers never deal with simulcast.   Anything 
> we add for simulcast is already well in the realm of an advanced use case.

Given the years the Media Capture and Streams WG spent defining an 
overly complex constraints language, I find the repeated assumption in 
this thread that a track can be constrained to any arbitrary size and 
frame rate, amusing.

If it were true, it would offer amazing simplifications to that spec, like:

   function fitnessDistance() { return 0 }; // = Whatever you want.

   typedef MediaTrackSettingsMediaConstraintsSet; // no min|max|exact|ideal
   typedef MediaConstraintsSet MediaTrackConstraints; // bye-bye advanced!

Despite having sunk effort into implementing this already, I would 
personally welcome it. Just make up your collective minds.

If that's not happening, then I find scaleResolutionDownBy and 
maxFramerate useful outside of simulcast.

.: Jan-Ivar :.
Received on Tuesday, 16 February 2016 23:27:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:47 UTC