Add a new webrtcCodec parameter to MediaCapabilitiesInfo #186
Conversation
|
Generally looks good. See questions in #185 (posting there to increase visibility). |
| @@ -867,6 +880,25 @@ spec: secure-contexts; urlPrefix: https://www.w3.org/TR/secure-contexts/ | |||
| source has side effects such as enabling different encoding | |||
| modules. | |||
| </li> | |||
| <li> | |||
| If the user agent is able to encode the media represented by | |||
| <var>configuration</var> and <var>configuration</var> has a type | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we link "type" explicitly to a config member?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the "valid audio MIME type" and "valid video MIME type" from section 2.1.4 are probably good targets.
| <ol> | ||
| <li>Let <var>webrtc</var> be a | ||
| {{WebRTCMediaCapabilitiesInfo}} dictionary.</li> | ||
| <li>If audio is represented by <var>configuration</var>, set |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly, can we link to something that explicitly determines "audio" and "video" types are being represented?
| <ol> | ||
| <li>Let <var>webrtc</var> be a | ||
| {{WebRTCMediaCapabilitiesInfo}} dictionary.</li> | ||
| <li>If audio is represented by <var>configuration</var>, set |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same comments as above about determining audio and video is being represented the configuration.
|
I think we need this, now that we're using codec descriptions more in APIs. |
|
Discussed at today's WebRTC interim and this would probably help moving WebRTC piggy backing on Media Capabilities to expose codecs (instead of exposing all/most codecs). |
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <[email protected]>
Fixes #185
Preview | Diff
Preview | Diff