Intent to Ship: MediaCapabilities API for WebRTC

[Johannes Kron]

Contact emails

kr...@google.com

Explainer

https://github.com/drkron/media-capabilities/blob/webrtc_examples/explainer.md#webrtc
https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/pull/191

Specification

https://w3c.github.io/media-capabilities/

Summary

Extends the MediaCapabilities API to support WebRTC streams. The MediaCapabilities API helps websites to make informed decisions on what codec, resolution, etc. to use for video playback by providing information about whether a configuration is supported and also whether the playback is expected to be smooth. This feature extends the MediaCapabilities API to also include WebRTC streams.

Blink component

Blink>Media>Capabilities

TAG review

This is a straightforward extension of an existing API.

TAG review status

Not applicable

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020)

WebKit: Shipped/Shipping (https://webkit.org/blog/12033/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-134/)

Web developers: No signals

Other signals:

WebView Application Risks

Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications?

No.

Debuggability

N/A

Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests?

Yes

Flag name

MediaCapabilitiesWebRtc

Requires code in //chrome?

False

Tracking bug

https://crbug.com/1187565

Launch bug

https://crbug.com/1170306

Measurement

Two UseCounters have been added: WebFeature::kMediaCapabilitiesDecodingInfoWebrtc and WebFeature::kMediaCapabilitiesEncodingInfoWebrtc. See https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/3494617

Non-OSS dependencies

Does the feature depend on any code or APIs outside the Chromium open source repository and its open-source dependencies to function?

No.

Estimated milestones

No milestones specified

Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status

https://chromestatus.com/feature/6242376685191168

Links to previous Intent discussions

Intent to prototype: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/g/blink-dev/c/lE1qySPAEMs/m/29OgzgyoAgAJ
Intent to Experiment: https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFJBoCR3marbZsVSOmeimizJY9Q%3DbTp0PCfaNawn3XZuXkmvNA%40mail.gmail.com

This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status.

[Mike Taylor]

On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote:

Contact emails

kr...@google.com

Explainer

https://github.com/drkron/media-capabilities/blob/webrtc_examples/explainer.md#webrtc
https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/pull/191

Specification

https://w3c.github.io/media-capabilities/

Summary

Extends the MediaCapabilities API to support WebRTC streams. The MediaCapabilities API helps websites to make informed decisions on what codec, resolution, etc. to use for video playback by providing information about whether a configuration is supported and also whether the playback is expected to be smooth. This feature extends the MediaCapabilities API to also include WebRTC streams.

Blink component

Blink>Media>Capabilities

TAG review

This is a straightforward extension of an existing API.

TAG review status

Not applicable

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020)

Could you please request a more formal position at https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAFJBoCT2deSuxdos%2BLX6_ZEwfsRngPhsELwRGCm%3DrXYgv4RH%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Yoav Weiss]

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 6:33:31 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote:

On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote:

Contact emails

kr...@google.com

Explainer

https://github.com/drkron/media-capabilities/blob/webrtc_examples/explainer.md#webrtc
https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/pull/191

Specification

https://w3c.github.io/media-capabilities/

Summary

Extends the MediaCapabilities API to support WebRTC streams. The MediaCapabilities API helps websites to make informed decisions on what codec, resolution, etc. to use for video playback by providing information about whether a configuration is supported and also whether the playback is expected to be smooth. This feature extends the MediaCapabilities API to also include WebRTC streams.

Blink component

Blink>Media>Capabilities

TAG review

This is a straightforward extension of an existing API.

That's not the right reason for this being exempt from a TAG review. I think that a TAG review is not needed because this was accepted in the WG and there's already another browser engine shipping this.

At the same time, seems worthwhile to at least file an FYI TAG review issue. 

TAG review status

Not applicable

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020)

Could you please request a more formal position at https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions?

WebKit: Shipped/Shipping (https://webkit.org/blog/12033/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-134/)

Web developers: No signals

Any signals from web developers? https://goo.gle/developer-signals 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[Johannes Kron]

Thank you Mike and Yoav for your feedback!

I accidentally responded with Reply to sender instead of Reply all. Trying again, see my response below.

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 6:33 PM Mike Taylor <mike...@chromium.org> wrote:

On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote:

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020)

Could you please request a more formal position at https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions?

I've filed a request for a formal position here,

https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/619

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 7:55 PM Yoav Weiss <yoav...@chromium.org> wrote:

On Monday, March 14, 2022 at 6:33:31 PM UTC+1 Mike Taylor wrote:

On 3/14/22 1:30 PM, 'Johannes Kron' via blink-dev wrote:

Contact emails

kr...@google.com

Explainer

https://github.com/drkron/media-capabilities/blob/webrtc_examples/explainer.md#webrtc
https://github.com/w3c/media-capabilities/pull/191

Specification

https://w3c.github.io/media-capabilities/

Summary

Extends the MediaCapabilities API to support WebRTC streams. The MediaCapabilities API helps websites to make informed decisions on what codec, resolution, etc. to use for video playback by providing information about whether a configuration is supported and also whether the playback is expected to be smooth. This feature extends the MediaCapabilities API to also include WebRTC streams.

Blink component

Blink>Media>Capabilities

TAG review

This is a straightforward extension of an existing API.

That's not the right reason for this being exempt from a TAG review. I think that a TAG review is not needed because this was accepted in the WG and there's already another browser engine shipping this.

At the same time, seems worthwhile to at least file an FYI TAG review issue. 

I agree that those are better reasons for not doing a full TAG review. I've filed a FYI TAG review issue as you requested, see https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/720

I hope that this is treated as a FYI and is not blocking the Intent to Ship?

 

Risks

Interoperability and Compatibility

Gecko: Positive (https://www.w3.org/2011/04/webrtc/wiki/December_02_2020)

Could you please request a more formal position at https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions?

WebKit: Shipped/Shipping (https://webkit.org/blog/12033/release-notes-for-safari-technology-preview-134/)

Web developers: No signals

Any signals from web developers? https://goo.gle/developer-signals 

 This should have been N/A. Due to the strong support from the working group I didn't see a reason to do an outreach to web developers, especially since this is a relatively straightforward extension of the existing API.

[Yoav Weiss]

It indeed shouldn't be a blocker.

[jmedley via Chromestatus]

In which version are you hoping to ship?

[Johannes Kron]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 5:38 PM jmedley via Chromestatus <admin+...@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote:

In which version are you hoping to ship?

All code has landed except a few minor tweaks that I'm currently working on so my goal is to ship this in M101.

Do you think that's reasonable?

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/000000000000d119f605da446d82%40google.com.

[Yoav Weiss]

LGTM1

Following Safari here makes sense. Please follow up on feedback from Mozilla around fingerprintability and how we can provide reasonable advice in the spec on how implementations can reduce its surface.

On Tuesday, March 15, 2022 at 7:25:04 PM UTC+1 Johannes Kron wrote:

On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 5:38 PM jmedley via Chromestatus <admin+jmedley@cr-status.appspotmail.com> wrote:

In which version are you hoping to ship?

All code has landed except a few minor tweaks that I'm currently working on so my goal is to ship this in M101.

Do you think that's reasonable?

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[mkwst via Chromestatus]

LGTM2, but I'd second Yoav's request to pay attention to the discussion around fingerprinting. My understanding is that we're going to be bucketing things in our implementation so as to reduce the total surface exposed via different configurations. That feels like a reasonable place to start, but given the heterogeneity of devices upon which Chrome runs, it might not be the last thing we need to do as a mitigation.

[Mike Taylor]

LGTM3

On 3/16/22 9:30 AM, mkwst via Chromestatus wrote:

LGTM2, but I'd second Yoav's request to pay attention to the discussion around fingerprinting. My understanding is that we're going to be bucketing things in our implementation so as to reduce the total surface exposed via different configurations. That feels like a reasonable place to start, but given the heterogeneity of devices upon which Chrome runs, it might not be the last thing we need to do as a mitigation.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/000000000000b55afd05da55ead9%40google.com.

[Johannes Kron]

Thanks for the approvals!

I'll follow up on the feedback from Mozilla and will also monitor the information exposed through the API.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/58c249e1-ef93-249a-3e45-9c9e1ec3c9e1%40chromium.org.