[Bug 26372] Report issues/events not related to a specific method call

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26372

--- Comment #16 from Joe Steele <steele@adobe.com> ---
(In reply to David Dorwin from comment #14)
> (In reply to Joe Steele from comment #13)
> > (In reply to David Dorwin from comment #12)
> > > (In reply to Joe Steele from comment #11)
> > > > (In reply to David Dorwin from comment #10)
> > > > Assuming the answer is no, this sounds reasonable to me. I would like to
> > > > include "downscaling" as one of the options (perhaps as a subset of output
> > > > protection).
> > > 
> > > That would potentially address bug 25092.
> > > 
> > > However, it would imply that downscaling means that a key is "not usable",
> > > which could be confusing since the CDM is actually using it for decryption.
> > 
> > I don't think it implies that. I think it is "less usable", but still
> > usable. The ability to include a status with the usableKeys gives us a scale
> > of usability - from completely unfettered, to usable but with restrictions,
> > to completely unusable. 
> 
> I was referring to the key's removal from the array returned by
> getUsableKeyIds(). A keyschange event implies that the list has changed.
> Firing keyschange just to report an enum value does not seem appropriate.

This seems like an appropriate use to me. The usability of the key has changed.
It is not a binary change, but more of a sliding scale. 

> 
> > This is the only example of "less usable" that I know I would use, but I can
> > imagine others. For example, the CDM could report that output protection is
> > required or that the expiration of the key is immanent. Those could be
> > useful to the application when deciding how to handle errors.
> 
> Wouldn't output protection required and not present result in an unusable
> key? I don't believe "imminent expiration" should be handled by this mechanism.
> We already have the expiration attribute, and we'd have to define "imminent."

Fair enough -- I was just throwing these out there. 

> Reporting downscaling with just an enum wouldn't be future-proof. Today,
> downscaled probably means the application should fetch a 480p stream
> instead, but what if there were multiple levels of downscaling? (See bug
> 25092#c21 for another possible solution.)

I think we should talk about the proposal in bug 25092 in the telco tomorrow.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Monday, 8 September 2014 21:57:21 UTC