Agree that Camera pretty much needs a re-write (or a good audit). The number of bugs for it is really piling up. AFAICT, Camera is a useful API, and Capture is useful for video/audio, but not really useful for pictures.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > it is perhaps not with some irony that the Media Capture API as implemented > in ChromeView is a direct descendant of our Capture API which is now out of > date. > > The inventory: > > - Camera API Plugin (non standard but offers more flexability than the W3C > spec) > - Capture API Plugin (out of date thus non-standard) > - ChromeView Media Capture API aka getUserMedia (non functional in Mobile > Chrome so I'm guessing the same in Mobile ChromeView [0]) > > FWIW, I'd be happy to see Camera an extension of Capture. We need to update > the latter anyhow. > > > [0] http://brian.io/hacks/media-capture/ <--webkit things only / should > work in FF > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey > > > > So, right now on KitKat, the Camera API is super borked. You can't > > save to album, since the Media Provider is giving paths that don't > > exist, and also you can't actually pull from the album since they > > changed the URI encoding and made it a lot more difficult to move from > > a Java URI to a String and back. > > > > That being said, the Capture API seems to still work perfectly fine. > > I can take a picture, and I don't get an awful stack trace. Which > > leads me to this next two questions: > > > > 1. Why do we have multiple APIs that do roughly the same thing? > > 2. Can we extend Capture to grab from Gallery and save photos? > > > > I don't think these will solve the problem per-se, but it'd be good to > > talk about it again. On another note, I started a fork for a re-write > > of the Camera plugin for KitKat, since it really needs a good refactor > > and a re-write since it's even less working than InAppBrowser. :( > > > > Joe > > >
