- From: Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:13:19 +0200
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- CC: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 2013-05-28 11:42, Adam Bergkvist wrote: > On 2013-05-28 11:23, Harald Alvestrand wrote: >> On 05/28/2013 11:09 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote: >>> This might be a case where we should ask for advice from some external >>> group (e.g. public-script-coord) so we don't violate some Web Platform >>> level properties. >> >> Sounds like something to ask Anne on Wednesday. >> I *think* futures are an example of the "must succeed or fail" contract, >> I don't know what the state of a future is if neither happens before the >> context is destroyed. > > Good idea. Let's do that. I asked annevk about how a Future returned from, e.g., createOffer() would behave and he thought that the Future should be rejected if the PeerConnection was closed before the Future could be resolved [1]. So regarding calling the error callback after the PeerConnection has closed, it probably better to allow that to make our API more Future-like (and make a possible move to futures smother). /Adam [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jun/0013.html
Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2013 11:13:51 UTC