W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2012

Re: CHANGE: [Bug 18486] New: Let RTCSessionDescription take a Dictionary parameter

From: ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ <tommyw@google.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 16:43:28 +0200
Message-ID: <CALLKCfN1Dm90kB3C3Bwm+iGJRSZKZBFRPbciPo6T0JV8WUeGSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
Cc: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "<public-webrtc@w3.org>" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
It has been pointed out to me that the stringify algorithm is broken,
especially for RTCSessionDescription since the sdp member most certainly
contains newlines. Should had noticed that myself, doh.

Also some clarification regarding exactly what the end result is need to be
put in the specification.
We had a discussion regarding if this was meant to be JSON or not.

/Tommy

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Tommy Widenflycht (ᛏᚮᛘᛘᚤ) <
tommyw@google.com> wrote:

> I'm fine both with removing the stringifier and letting it create "JS
> object strings" as long as everyone understands that it
> isn't necessarily JSON compatible.
>
> JSON.stringify(object) != (string)object
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <
> fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> This one is not a real big deal to me one way or ther other but the
>> string still seems nicer in the exmaple code I have. Is there a real strong
>> argument one way or the other?
>>
>>
>> On Aug 6, 2012, at 9:52 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > [Chair hat on]
>> > Based on discussion so far, this seems reasonable.
>> > If anyone objects, please say so Real Soon (like in the next 48 hours).
>> >
>> >            Harald
>> >
>> > On 08/04/2012 02:22 AM, bugzilla@jessica.w3.org wrote:
>> >> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=18486
>> >>
>> >>            Summary: Let RTCSessionDescription take a Dictionary
>> parameter
>> >>            Product: WebRTC Working Group
>> >>            Version: unspecified
>> >>           Platform: PC
>> >>         OS/Version: Linux
>> >>             Status: NEW
>> >>           Severity: normal
>> >>           Priority: P2
>> >>          Component: WebRTC API
>> >>         AssignedTo: public-webrtc@w3.org
>> >>         ReportedBy: harald@alvestrand.no
>> >>                 CC: public-webrtc@w3.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >From Tommy Widenflycht, July 31 (see mailing list for discussion):
>> >>
>> >> Today I would like to propose a small change to RTCSessionDescription
>> and
>> >> RTCIceCandidate which would make the much more flexible:
>> >>
>> >> [Constructor(optional Dictionary description)]
>> >> interface RTCSessionDescription {
>> >>              attribute RTCSdpType type;
>> >>              attribute DOMString  sdp;
>> >> };
>> >>
>> >> In short the single constructor takes an Dictionary which is expected
>> to mimic
>> >> its members, and the stringifier method is removed.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> This has the advantages of being extremely powerful:
>> >>
>> >> sd = new RTCSessionDescription();
>> >> sd.sdp = ...;
>> >> sd.type = ...;
>> >>
>> >> sd = new RTCSessionDescription({sdp:"..."});
>> >> sd.type = ...;
>> >>
>> >> sd = new RTCSessionDescription({type:"answer", sdp:"..."});
>> >>
>> >> sd = new RTCSessionDescription(JSON.parse(some_json_string));
>> >>
>> >> sd2 = new RTCSessionDescription(sd);
>> >>
>> >> and in the other direction
>> >>
>> >> jsonified_sd = JSON.stringify(sd);
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> There's some precedence in using a constructor like this in some of
>> the base
>> >> Event classes.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Tommy Widenflycht | Senior Software Engineer | tommyw@google.com | +46
> 734162531
> Google Sweden AB, Kungsbron 2, SE-11122 Stockholm, Sweden
> Org. nr. 556656-6880
>
>
>


-- 
Tommy Widenflycht | Senior Software Engineer | tommyw@google.com | +46
734162531
Google Sweden AB, Kungsbron 2, SE-11122 Stockholm, Sweden
Org. nr. 556656-6880
Received on Friday, 24 August 2012 14:43:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 24 August 2012 14:43:56 GMT