- From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 09:55:47 +0000
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 23/09/15 11:47, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: > Reading back on this discussion I note: > > - discussion on why RTCIceCandidate is not a dictionary, but it seems to > become one with [1] > - arguments that if we have "fail on malformed" when constructing we > should have it on addIceCandidate as well - but I don't think we have a > check when constructing PS One argument for changing as [2] proposes is IMO consistency. setLocal/Remote has no "fail on malformed" step, why should addIceCandidate? > > > So I think it makes sense to merge [2]. Anyone disagreeing? > > Stefan > > [1] https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/302 > [2] https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/242 > > On 17/07/15 10:22, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 07/16/2015 05:27 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote: >>> On 7/15/15 5:03 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >>>>> 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. >>> >>> Good point. Not to advocate change, but just for info, what was the >>> rationale for RTCIceCandidate not just being a dictionary? >> >> Speaking from memory.... >> >> when RTCIceCandidate and RTCSessionDescription were added to the spec, >> we felt that having these as interfaces would allow us to provide them >> with accessors and manipulators at a later stage (one could imagine >> having RTCIceCandidate having a "syntacticallyValid" attribute, for >> instance). >> >> This was before we started falling in love with dictionaries. Many moons >> ago.... >> >> >> >> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2015 09:56:13 UTC