- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 23:16:20 +0000
- To: public-audio@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20415 Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> --- (In reply to comment #3) > That sample was just enumerating the parameters for debugging purposes, > though - serialization implies deserialization. I don't think the > "serialize everything in the input/output object" is a particularly > interesting scenario, unless you're trying to imply that fromJSON() could > re-create the port - and this is a "magic host object". :) Ok, fair call. I currently don't have a case for serialization (apart form using it as a stringifier in debugging). I think there might be a case for storing serialized versions of previously used ports, etc. But I need to encounter the actual use case through playing around a bit more with the API.... Can we mark this as RESOLVED/NEEDSINFO? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 17 December 2012 23:16:27 UTC