- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 19:03:08 +0200
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- CC: "Tommy Widenflycht (?????)" <tommyw@google.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 19 september 2011 18:01, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > Just so it's clear - at the moment, I like the no-inheritance > model that Adam proposed better than either what's in the > current draft or my own proposal. > > I haven't yet thought of an use case I could do with the > inheritance proposal that I couldn't also do in the > no-inheritance proposal, and in that case, I prefer simplicity. > > Harald I'll try to summarize the state of this discussion. Proposed change 1: A MediaStream, created from an other MediaStream, should be regarded as an independent stream. Enabling or disabling a MediaStreamTrack in one stream will not affect any track in the other stream. Status: Most people seem to support this approach. Proposed change 2: The MediaStream constructor should take a list of MediaStreamTracks, which makes it possible to combine tracks from several streams into a new MediaStream (see older mails for use case). Status: Some support, some think it may be more powerful than what we need. No real objections. Is this a correct summary? BR Adam
Received on Monday, 26 September 2011 17:03:57 UTC