Re: The mandatory constraint is a footgun

On 12/11/2013 5:39 AM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
> On 11/12/13 3:11 AM, cowwoc wrote:
>> +1 except that there should be a requirement for ignored constraints 
>> to trigger an event (for logging locally or sent back to the server). 
>> This will avoid silent failures.
>
> Old browsers are designed to ignore new features in most web APIs, 
> according to Travis 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-capture/2013Oct/0129.html
>
> Basically, we can't do it without violating webidl, so we'd need a 
> good reason, which I don't think we have.
>
> With this idea, the script can query the browser for what it doesn't 
> support and send back to the server once on page-load if it wants, so 
> no need for events on every API call.

That's fine with me, though "it would be nice" if browsers would log 
attempt to use unsupported capabilities (in case of user error).

Gili