- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 22:01:15 +0200
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com>
- CC: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
On 10/23/2013 09:46 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 23 October 2013 11:09, Jim Barnett <Jim.Barnett@genesyslab.com> wrote: >> ‘Mandatory’ is supposed to mean “I have to have this or I don’t want to run >> my app”. In the case of adding ‘unknownKey’ as a mandatory constraint, the >> old UAs don’t support it, so the app shouldn’t run on them. If what the >> author wants to say is “I’d like to have unknownKey, but I’ll work around it >> if it’s not available”, then an optional constraint will work fine. >> Unknown optional constraints are ignored. > > I could choose to read Travis' input as "mandatory constraints == bad". Yes, and if I read it like that, I just disagree with him, that's OK. Disagreement is normal. I could make the opposite argument based on the same set of principles. I think apps should have the privillege of not running if they don't want to run under specific circumstances; if we don't give them a clean way of finding out whether those circumstances apply, they are going to find unclean ones.
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2013 20:01:37 UTC