- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 14:03:04 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26887 --- Comment #4 from Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> --- (In reply to David Dorwin from comment #3) > (In reply to Jerry Smith from comment #2) > > What type of IDs would be grouped? Key IDs? Stored IDs? I think Mark's use > case is 1:1 for license:storage. The need to group (key?) IDs in the > proposed case seems to be a symptom of a problem. > Let's say the only IDs we exposed on the API were key IDs and there was no concept or context in which they were grouped together in any way. So, the available key IDs would be exposed on *MediaKeys*. MediaKeySession would be purely ephemeral for the purpose of message processing state. My point was that, starting here, we would then need to introduce some kind of grouping of key IDs because some operations only operate at the level of a group of key IDs, not at an individual key ID level. For example, release and persistence operate on licenses - which we do not expose explicitly, but which manifest on the API in the fact that keys are released and persisted as a group. Such a grouping could be introduced explicitly, perhaps we would even call it 'licenses'. Or we could note that the grouping aligns with the sessions and use the MediaKeySession for this grouping. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2014 14:03:06 UTC