- From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:31:22 -0500
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
I'm trying to give my incoming/outgoing ICE candidates event handler a
consistent interface. In the case of locally-generated (outgoing) ICE
candidates I get a RTCPeerConnectionIceEvent from the browser. I was
hoping to generate the same for incoming ICE candidates.
I can always strip out the event and just pass the underlying candidate
but it's not clear whether RTCPeerConnectionIceEvent will contain
additional values in the future.
Gili
On 11/02/2014 3:28 PM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> I've a better question: why would anyone want to do that in their
> application? Why do we define this as having a constructor, rather
> than just defining it as [NoInterfaceObject].
>
> On 11 February 2014 12:23, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/#rtcpeerconnectioniceevent states that
>> RTCPeerConnectionIceEvent's constructor takes two arguments, but fails to
>> define the first one ("type").
>>
>> What is the meaning of "type" and what are legal values?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gili
>>
Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 20:31:53 UTC