Re: Possible Constraint Syntax Compromise from Martin Thomson on 2014-05-21 (public-media-capture@w3.org from May 2014)

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:51:22 -0700
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com>, "public-media-capture@w3.org" <public-media-capture@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CABkgnnWHioKaZ4Ht3egvw+5LXC5CBnpLu6uHMvV5A=2Vc=GqxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 21 May 2014 10:47, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote:
> Right, but this one needs to react to an unbounded set of values (media
> types with parameters); in our case, we have a list of well-known
> values, so a method sounds like an overkill.

Yes, the only promise that presence in this set provides is that the
browser will not ignore it when provided.  This isn't a promise to
support the value.

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 17:51:50 UTC