Re: Proposed resolution on the "change booleans to enums" issue

Just a reminder, we put April 27th as the deadline for comments to the 
proposed resolution - and that's tomorrow!

On 19/04/16 18:53, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> Over the last few weeks, we’ve had a long drawn out discussion based
> around the following github issues and PRs:
>
> - PR #466 “Use an enum to describe directionality of RTP stream”
> - PR #467 “Use enum for voiceActivityDetection”
> - PR #471 “Use enum for RTCDataChannal’s ordered attribute”
>
> These are based on issue #375, “true as default values for dictionary is
> bad practice”.
>
> Among the arguments fielded are:
>
> - Following the WebIDL spec’s advice is a Good Thing in general
> - Changing interfaces that people have implemented for aesthetic reasons
> is a Bad Thing in general
> - Double negatives (disableX = false) is a Bad Thing and should be avoided
> - VoiceActivityDetection is such a strange thing, it doesn’t matter if
> it’s true or false
> - Transceiver direction needs to be 1:1 mapped to SDP direction, so an
> enum is fine there (rather than two default-true bools)
> - Transceiver shouldn’t be more SDP-like than necessary, so two
> direction variables is better.
>
> Settled issues:
> - SupportedCapabilties uses true as a default, but that’s a special
> case, and we won’t change that.
>
> Positions taken:
>
>>From PR discussions:
>
> - pthatcher: Doesn’t mind too much either way, but would like to see
> existing code continue to work (do the “or boolean” thing).
> - hta: doesn’t like changing existing implemented APIs without enough
> reason. Breaking compatibility is bad.
> - martin: thinks directionality change looks good (371), no comments
> elsewhere.
>
>>From the public-mediacapture mailing list, Feb 17 - March 3, subject
> line “Using enums to avoid default true…”
>
>
> - Adam Bergkvist: Flip the attribute names in #467 and #471, PR
> improvement in #466. Argues for “disableVoiceActivityDetection” in
> particular.
> - Peter Thatcher: Double negaties are bad. Is change worth it?
> - Martin Thomson: The guidance is reasonable - “exists for a reason”
> - Jan-Ivar Bruarøy: Not following WebIDL advice is hazardous
>
> Conclusions to be drawn:
>
> - I don’t think we have consensus for introducing double negatives.
> They’re out. But “ordered -> order” seems like it could be an acceptable
> rename.
> - There’s not much of a majority opinion towards using enums (Martin &
> Jan-Ivar strong).
> - The use of the “or Boolean” trick makes changing to enum more
> palatable to those who dislike backwards-incompatible changes
> - The “ordered” attribute in datachannels needs to follow the parameter
>
> Proposed plan of action:
>
> - There seems to be an established base for voiceActivityDetection and
> the Ordered attribute, and not a clear consensus for change. I suggest
> we DO NOT CHANGE these.
>
> - There is no clear consensus for changing the directionality attribute
> for RTP streams, but here we have no deployed base, and letting
> RTPTransceiver mirror the SDP semantics of the direction attribute more
> closely seems like a Good Thing.
> I suggest we DO CHANGE this one.
>
> If people don’t indicate that they have strong objections to this
> resolution by Wednesday, April 27, the chairs will instruct the editors
> to implement this decision.
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2016 17:10:17 UTC