W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-orca@w3.org > September 2013

Re: setXxxxxDescription() vs setters/properties [via ORCA - Object-RTC API Community Group]

From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 17:53:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfkMsUyUBGZw716LHAbW=gPts8CvWTohHOqgMn=gNL4RcQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>
Cc: public-orca <public-orca@w3.org>
2013/8/30 Robin Raymond <robin@hookflash.com>
>
>
>
> Wanted to address this:
>
> myConnection.remote.ice.userFrag = XXXXX;
> myConnection.remote.ice.passwd = XXXXX;
>
> myConnection.connect();
>
>
>
> There's also a different way to do it so you aren't in an intermediate state (half set):
>
> myConnection.remote.ice = {userFrag: XXXXX; passwd: XXXXX;};
> myConnection.connect();
>
> Just keep that in mind when you are doing the API that getter / setters can take entire objects, not just single one at a time settings.
>
> I think with any API we do, we should remember we'll have to "shim" it over top of the ugly SDP API, so we have to make sure whatever we do can be wired appropriately.


Hi Robin, I insist:

If we want connection.local and connection.remote then we must define
what "local" and "remote" are, which means more spec complexity
(IMHO). And honestly still I see no benefit in the approach you
propose. Why is it better to require two lines instead of just one
when we *always* need userFrag and password for connecting the remote?

Maybe I miss something :)


-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>
Received on Monday, 2 September 2013 15:54:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:39:21 UTC