- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 22:52:47 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25200 --- Comment #6 from David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> --- As noted in the telecon this week, the purpose of the original proposal is to allow an application (and license server) that supports both "streaming" (temporary) licenses and persisted licenses to request a specific type. Such an application might normally stream content but also allow content and licenses to be persisted - for example, for offline playback on an airplane. This does not necessarily address other types of (non-content) keys that may be persisted on the client. We should address those use cases separately. (It's possible that those use cases may end up using this same parameter in some way.) As for the naming, maybe we should use "temporary" and "persistent". This is explicit and consistent with the Quota API (http://www.w3.org/TR/quota-api/#storagetype-enum). However, we may need to add another type of app-persistable licenses if there is desire to support this model. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 4 April 2014 22:52:48 UTC