- From: Mark Foltz via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 19:11:05 +0000
- To: public-secondscreen@w3.org
Also see Issue #205 where I raise the issue of how to treat `defaultRequest` and `receiver` in UAs that conform to one class but not the other. Personally I would prefer leaving the attributes undefined in user agents that don't implement the corresponding interfaces or functionality. Literally there is no reason to have the attribute at all and that is consistent with other cases where the user agent does not implement a web platform feature, i.e. as a developer I would expect Navigator.foo to be undefined if foo is not implemented. I guess this is option #1 above? For IDL harness testing, maybe we can tag parts of the IDL to be present in the receiving or controlling UA, and extract two different IDLs. Each conformance class should have its own IDL test anyway, right? -- GitHub Notification of comment by mfoltzgoogle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/presentation-api/issues/230#issuecomment-165873540 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 18 December 2015 19:11:06 UTC