W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-capture@w3.org > May 2014

Re: Possible Constraint Syntax Compromise

From: Dan Burnett <dburnett@voxeo.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 06:50:16 -0400
Cc: public-media-capture@w3.org
Message-Id: <09C6FBE1-D7F2-4ABB-A459-88277E0BEDC2@voxeo.com>
To: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterriberry@mozilla.com>
Jan-Ivar might want to comment here, as he has often explained that Firefox does its parsing based on WebIDL and that an unknown constraint disappears during that process.  As our standard list of constrainable properties becomes more and more supported the need to check in advance for such unknown constraints should also diminish, unless of course the developer is specifically using a non-standard (e.g., experimental) constraint.

-- dan

On May 20, 2014, at 9:16 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:

> Peter Thatcher wrote:
>> Out of those three, all the people I talked to preferred #3, which is
>> why I have proposed it.  If there is something we are all missing about
>> WebIDL that gives an easier exit from this conundrum, that would be
>> welcome news.
> No, it does not surprise me this is not expressible in WebIDL, so I guess it will not throw an exception. But we're still required by contract to call either the success or error callback, and what it sounded like you were saying was that the browser was free to ignore the constraint completely and return success.
Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 10:50:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:26:27 UTC