Re: maxHeight and maxWidth

How is this discussion limited to screencasts? Didn't you say "camera" a 
couple messages ago?

.: Jan-Ivar :.

On 2/16/16 10:00 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
> This was brought up specifically in the context of screencasts.  I 
> assume a screencast track implementation could easily meet arbitrary 
> min/max resolution constraints (by scaling).
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com 
> <mailto:jib@mozilla.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 2/13/16 11:50 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>>     ​I 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 :.
>
>


-- 
.: Jan-Ivar :.