Malcolm Caldwell wrote:
On Fri, 2002-03-22 at 09:29, Mark McClelland wrote:
Billy Biggs wrote:
I think you're right though. Instead of doing a libv4l that nobody
would use, we should work on having lots of libs with inconsistent
interfaces, but at least the code would be shared.
I think a library is needed. It should be fairly minimal. Perhaps just
color conversion etc. Why should my application have code written
specifically for every different broken webcam that exists?
Some kind of extensible minimal library may be desirable. That way we
could get the webcam decompression code out of the kernel. No more
closed source kernel modules...
I would say a minimal, easy to use, library would be used. I would say
that every v4l programmer started with xawtv and worked from there. If
xawtv were re-written to use the new library then things should be
sweet.
I don't think scaling, de-interlacing, etc belong in such a library.
How about a minimal libv4l with a consistent interface for the other
libraries to "plug in" to? That way, libv4l would provide a standard
mechanism without enforcing the "policy" of a particular deinterlacer,
scaler, etc...
You mean like a default libv4l with basic "policy"
compression/uncompression and a libpwc or libse401 type library for more
advanced and webcam specific compression/uncompression type stuff?
(showing my ignorance er.. newbieness through careful word play)
altoine
