- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 20:44:05 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26776 Joe Steele <steele@adobe.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |steele@adobe.com --- Comment #4 from Joe Steele <steele@adobe.com> --- (In reply to Anne from comment #2) > a) Why is only Microsoft interested in this? b) Can this be something that > just goes to the developer console? This is something Adobe is very interested in as well. As a practical matter, having exact error codes available to the application makes debugging problems much simpler and faster for developers who end up using our CDM. (In reply to Mark Watson from comment #3) > Having said that, it's not clear to me why we could not simply define a > recommended convention for the message field in the EME case - for example > that it begin with a numeric code followed by whitespace. If we think this is important enough to have a convention, it would seem important enough to have a separate numeric field. I think we lost some of the context from bug 25896, specifically this comment [1]. I am just not sure where to put it. Again as a practical matter, we can expose the numeric codes that way as a last resort. But it will require us to define a convention for those codes (i.e. base-10, unsigned, range 0-4billion, whitespace termination, etc.) and will require additional parsing code for any client that wants to make use of it. And this will impose a requirement on CDMs that do not expose such a value today to conform to the convention. [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25896#c10 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2014 20:44:07 UTC