Re: WebIDL-compatible syntax compromise from Dominique Hazael-Massieux on 2014-04-03 (public-media-capture@w3.org from April 2014)

From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:40:09 +0200
To: Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com>
Cc: public-media-capture@w3.org
Message-ID: <1396510809.3093.43.camel@cumulustier>

On mar., 2014-04-01 at 21:17 -0400, Dan Burnett wrote:
> At the teleconference last week we were tasked with finding a way to
> adjust the current constraint syntax in the specification, without
> loss of expressivity, into a syntax that was WebIDL-compatible.  We
> may have done one better.
>
> We have found a workable compromise. 

Thanks guys, this look quite good! 

My only comment is similar to one that others have made: I think
"advanced" is not very descriptive; I'm thinking maybe
"preferredProfiles" or something like that might be clearer. But I don't
feel strongly at all about it, and I'm happy to leave this to the
editors discretion as far as I am concerned.

Dom

Received on Thursday, 3 April 2014 07:40:25 UTC