Re: Sense of the WG on mediacapture-transform API

Speaking as an individual, my answers are (1) yes, (2) yes and (3) yes.
I believe Web-applications that want to jump in at the deep end of the pool
are welcome to do so. Guardrails are often appropriate for the user, but
rarely for the application.

On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:55 PM Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
wrote:

> Speaking as an individual (if other Googlers want to say something
> different, they will and they should):
>
>
> On 10/18/21 7:58 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>
> At the WebRTC WG Virtual Interim meeting on Thursday, October 14, 2021 we
> discussed the path forward on mediacapture-transform API.  The slides from
> the meeting are available here:
>
> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1rdaRvl3h3viqvndyJVzwIAPtOpMjx_2u7q7MBHUwbyY/
>
> We would now like to get a "sense of the WG" on the following questions:
>
> Question 1:  Should mediacapture-transform be based on streams?
>
> Yes.
>
>
> Question 2: Should mediacapture-transform support audio?
>
> Yes.
>
>
> Question 3: Should mediacapture-transform be exposed on the main thread?
>
> Yes.
>
>
>
> Potential answers to the questions are "Yes", "No" or "Undecided".
>
> Please respond to this "Sense of the WG" poll by Monday, October 25, 2021
> at midnight Pacific Time.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>