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

Error handling description (Re: First agenda proposal webrtc telco)

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:52:27 +0200
Message-ID: <503B89AB.3030407@alvestrand.no>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
CC: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>, public-webrtc@w3.org
On 08/27/2012 04:33 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Stefan Hakansson LK
> <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we should change this; instead have more frequent telcos with fewer
>> topic which we cover in depth. I would certainly be open for that if the WG
>> (and my co-chair) thinks it is a good idea. And it would be natural to focus
>> on covering the issues (in priority order) that block implementation in
>> those meetings.
> For my money, the best use of telcos is to resolve issues which aren't getting
> resolved on the list.
>
> My priorities may not match anyone else's but here are the things
> that I think are high priority (as in they are questions that are already
> holding up implementation):
>
> - A complete description of error handling. I.e., which functions throw
> exceptions, which have error callbacks. Do the functions which have
> error callbacks ever throw exceptions? What is the state of affairs
> after an error has occurred? Full disclosure: my position is that
> any given API call should have exactly one error reporting mechanism.
>
Eric, can you point to some API that describes its error handling 
clearly enough that we can use it as a pattern?

This one's been bothering me for a while, in that I see the need, but 
not how to answer it (or a volunteer to write a proposal).
Received on Monday, 27 August 2012 14:53:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 August 2012 14:53:02 GMT