-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Does capturing a stream from a canvas make sense? #16
Comments
Having an API that is --isomorphic--ducktyped to the one on |
... but it isn't, since you have the RequestFrame method on it. RequestFrame on a MediaStream that has had another track added to it doesn't make very much sense. I'd rather have the RequestFrame method on a track. |
|
OK, .requestFrame is a different question from whether we capture streams or tracks. But what's the merit for leaving it on the MediaStream? stream = canvas.CreateMediaStream() ? |
I'm not sure what you are suggesting exactly. I have no objection to one of the changes you are implicitly suggesting, namely: var stream = canvas.captureStream();
stream.videoTracks[0].requestFrame(); But I'm less happy with the idea that this might not be consistent with |
Note to @Pehrsons: since you are doing all the moving of features from |
Seems to me we have concluded that requestFrame() and the canvas element reference belong on a subclass of MediaStreamTrack, not on a subclass of MediaStream - but that we will continue to let canvas.captureStream() return a MediaStream. Seems good to me. |
Some boilerplate shuffling is involved but I don't see any issues in moving |
This is still |
Looking at the canvas capture case:
So why are we capturing a MediaStream subclass from the canvas?
I think it would be simpler if the spec said that you generate a track from a canvas, not a stream.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: