Short of a strong signal from other implementors, bug 961689 (which is "only" an optimization, no new API) seems like a more realistic approach than bugs 801176 and 709490 (new APIs available to web workers) if the goal is to bring something to the Web.
The main spirit of this project is not bugs 801176 and bug 709490. The whole blue print is in https://wiki.mozilla.org/Project_FoxEye . Since it is still in early stage, the wiki will be changed frequently. (In reply to David Bruant from comment #1) > Short of a strong signal from other implementors, bug 961689 (which is > "only" an optimization, no new API) seems like a more realistic approach > than bugs 801176 and 709490 (new APIs available to web workers) if the goal > is to bring something to the Web.
In current Web technology, we don't have a good(generic) way to do video/camera processing/analysis task. That limited the application developers to show their creative ideas on Web platform with camera and video. Those kind of features are important for mobile OS. There are of lots of popular Apps about camera/video processing area. For example, Amazon firefly, WeVideo, WordLens, Waygo, AR effects are popular apps in Android and iOS. Project FoxEye unleash those constraints by providing MediaStreamTrack with worker, OfflineMediaContext and WebImage library.
API draft for
Depends on: 1070216
API draft: MediaStream extension for VideoWorker. http://chiahungtai.github.io/mediacapture-worker/ Feel free to discuss it.
Component: Audio/Video → Audio/Video: MSG/cubeb/GMP
We don't have plans to pursue this experiment for now.
Priority: -- → P5
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.