- From: Sameer via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 15:24:28 +0000
- To: public-webrtc-logs@w3.org
> @sam-vi thoughts on this? Should we discuss it at the next meeting perhaps? I agree with this proposal. I will work on some next steps. > This seems like a mistake, allowing JS to compose invalid pairs and pass them as inputs. I can't be certain about the motivation for the original definition as a dictionary. But I imagine that prior to [selectCandidatePair](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#dom-rtcicetransport-selectcandidatepair) and [removeCandidatePair](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#dom-rtcicetransport-removecandidatepair), when the only use of RTCIceCandidatePair was as a return value for [getSelectedCandidatePair](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/#dom-rtcicetransport-getselectedcandidatepair), a less restrictive definition was adequate and there was no possibility of misuse of a malformed candidate pair. > I think the goal would be for [selectCandidatePair](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#dom-rtcicetransport-selectcandidatepair) and [removeCandidatePair](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#dom-rtcicetransport-removecandidatepair) to take the interface object (instead of a dictionary with two member interface objects). +1. With [[[CandidatePairs]]](https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-extensions/#dfn-candidatepairs), it is also possible to avoid pitfalls such as #2906. > I didn't find any WPT tests for these methods, so they're hopefully not implemented yet @sam-vi is that right? Correct. I recently got back from parental leave. I will continue work on the implementation and next steps for the spec. -- GitHub Notification of comment by sam-vi Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/issues/2930#issuecomment-2034918355 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 3 April 2024 15:24:29 UTC