- 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