W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > February 2013

Re: WebRTC spec errata (regarding states)

From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 15:58:51 +0100
Message-ID: <512F70AB.5070303@ericsson.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, Per Kjellander <perkj@google.com>, Mallinath Bareddy <mallinath@google.com>, Harald Alvestrand <hta@google.com>
I think we could start to edit this into the spec. I think the "null 
candidate behavior" is missing in the spec today and that will be good 
to have described. A minor comment below.

On 2013-02-21 00:44, Justin Uberti wrote:
>
>      4. 4.3.2.2 <http://4.3.2.2>: setLocalDescription
>         The description for this function should indicate that it
>         triggers a signaling state change. It should also indicate that
>         an INVALID_STATE exception is triggered if the wrong
>         SessionDescription.type is supplied for the current state.
>      5. 4.3.2.2 <http://4.3.2.2>: setRemoteDescription
>         The description for this function should indicate that it
>         triggers a signaling state change. It should also indicate that
>         an INVALID_STATE exception is triggered if the wrong
>         SessionDescription.type is supplied for the current state.

We've used INVALID_STATE consistently when an operation/function is not 
permitted at the current state. In this case, the operation itself (to 
set a remote description) is OK, but it's the argument that's bad. It 
would be more consistent with the text in 4.6.1 and our other functions 
to throw INVALID_STATE if the PeerConnection is closed and use, e.g., 
INVALID_SESSION_DESCRIPTION if the argument is invalid.

/Adam
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2013 14:59:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:32 UTC