W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-audio@w3.org > October to December 2012

[Bug 20505] merge getInput, getOutput -> getPort() or getPortById()

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 17:10:32 +0000
To: public-audio@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20505-5429-60DfxQKLL1@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20505

--- Comment #6 from Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Just wanted to record a random thought here:
> > 
> > getPort(DOMString id, optional MIDIPortType type);
> > 
> > As in: 
> > var port = midi.getPort("12e23f3", "input");
> 
> But why would you do that? For any given id, the type is predetermined (and
> fixed).

Jussi said that the fingerprint might not be reliable (i.e., an input and and
output would have the same fingerprint): "It would be especially annoying if
faced with a UA that doesn't have enough data to give reliable fingerprints, 
an application would've stored a fingerprint and assumed that the method would
return an output port, but was given an input port instead, resulting in an
error if it tried to send anything to it."

>  If you were going down this path (of collapsing Input and Output
> together), I would expect:
> 
> interface MIDIAccess {
>     sequence<MIDIPort> listInputs ();
>     sequence<MIDIPort> listOutputs ();
>     MIDIPort          getPort (MIDIPort or DOMString or short target);
> };

Sorry to again be a dumbass, but I really don't understand why you send a
MIDIPort to get a MIDIPort? Can you please explain the logic there?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 26 December 2012 17:10:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:04 UTC