Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > Yes. For example there are plans to enable some kind of "private mode" for > WebRTC MediaStreams that protects stream contents from inspection by the > page. I don't know exactly how this is going to work, but if we allow > MediaStreams to

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan > wrote: > > The widget would not only have to be written by a third party, but > actually > > hosted on their domain. And not just optionally, but for some reason the > > widget provide

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > The widget would not only have to be written by a third party, but actually > hosted on their domain. And not just optionally, but for some reason the > widget provider has decided not to allow the author to host it on their own > domain.

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Robert O'Callahan > wrote: > > What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, > what > > are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer? > > E.g. embedding a

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 2013-09-03 14:02, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK > wrote: >> I think it should stop playing since the object srcObject references is >> gone. (It would work differently with createObjecURL + myVideoTag.src >> since that would only be a handle to

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: > I think it should stop playing since the object srcObject references is > gone. (It would work differently with createObjecURL + myVideoTag.src > since that would only be a handle to an underlying resource) The object is not gone, it's

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 2013-09-03 12:01, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > On 09/03/2013 10:27 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: >> On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote: >>> What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, >>> what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the develope

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 09/03/2013 10:27 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote: What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer? E.g. the main page delegating communication to someo

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 2013-09-03 01:29, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, > what are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer? E.g. the main page delegating communication to someone else (perhaps via an iFrame). If the MediaStre

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > What are your use-cases where they're not the same? More importantly, what > are the use-cases where they cannot be made the same by the developer? E.g. embedding a widget for video or audio manipulation. The widget could be written by a

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Stefan Håkansson LK < stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com> wrote: > On 2013-09-02 01:44, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK > > > > wrote: > > > > One need I can see is when y

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 2013-09-02 01:44, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK > > wrote: > > One need I can see is when you want to display the video in another > window. Let's say you want to have the video in a popout window

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK < stefan.lk.hakans...@ericsson.com> wrote: > One need I can see is when you want to display the video in another > window. Let's say you want to have the video in a popout window - > something I think we should definitely support - handing that

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 2013-08-28 17:48, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > Hi WebApps WG, > > The Media Capture Task Force (responsible for specs that deal with > MediaStream objects [1]) has been considering whether one should be able > to assign a MediaStream to and elements via an URL > obtained via createObject

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Aug 28, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > Hi WebApps WG, > > The Media Capture Task Force (responsible for specs that deal with > MediaStream objects [1]) has been considering whether one should be able > to assign a MediaStream to and elements via an URL > obtained via cr

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On 29 August 2013 03:59, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > not > supporting createObjectURL() would be somewhat better if that's indeed > feasible. I'd be down for supporting that.

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:05 AM, Robert O'Callahan wrote: > I can't think of any good reason to support createObjectURL(MediaStream) --- > except for compatibility with existing content, which may be an issue > already. As I understand it, we have the createObjectURL() design because it's "easier

Re: Extending createObjectUrl to MediaStream?

On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: > We are thus looking for input on the use cases for createObjectURL as > used for the File API, and whether these use cases would also apply to > our MediaStream case. In general, is there a need for any object > readable by media