- From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:03:47 +0200
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Den 15. juli 2015 10:48, skrev Adam Bergkvist: > On 2015-07-09 12:25, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote: >> On 09/07/2015 12:09, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >>>> It does fail, but not with a SyntaxError (which is what I'm suggesting >>>> we remove). >>> >>> So you're suggesting we remove the SyntaxError, but continue failing ... >>> what are you suggesting we use as a failure instead? >>> >>> I'm much happier with proposing "change error code X to Y in case W" >>> than with "remove SytaxError". >> >> The spec already has a step failure after the current syntaxerror: >> If the candidate parameter is malformed, reject p with SyntaxError and >> jump to the step labeled Return. >> >> If the candidate could not be successfully applied, reject p with a >> DOMError object whose name attribute has the value TBD >> http://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/#widl-RTCPeerConnection-addIceCandidate-Promise-void--RTCIceCandidate-candidate >> >> I don't have a specific probably for what TBD should be; the spec >> suggests InvalidCandidate and InvalidMidIndex, but that probably needs >> to be revisited in light of how we now understand errors should be managed. >> >> But even if the whole picture is not clear yet, the reasons for removing >> syntaxerror (not well defined, not implemented, not necessary) still stand. >> >> Dom >> > > If we plan to fail when an RTCIceCandidate is constructed with a bad > candidate string, we need to perform the same check every time the > corresponding attribute is set. Yep. Which argues that the RTCIceCandidate should either be immutable or allow syntactically invalid candidates. Otherwise, this will work: c.candidate = part1 + ' ' + part2 but this will not work c.candidate = part1 c.candidate += ' ' c.candidate += part2 Violates the principle of least surprise.
Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 09:04:24 UTC