W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > August 2015

Re: Naming question to resolve: state vs. readystate vs connectionstate

From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:51:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-0ksgo_ezY4L-A_YPbR-CRBSn0smr-HeQoDBU8LGLEfKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
Cc: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Unless we have multiple states on the same object that make .state
ambiguous (which I don't think is the case here), I think .state >>
everything else.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
wrote:

> transport.transportState is needlessly verbose.  transport.readyState and
> transport.connectionState at least match something somewhere else.
>  transport.transportState might as well just be transport.state, since
> .transportState doesn't exist anywhere else.
>
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> wrote:
>
>> 2015-08-25 10:37 GMT+02:00 Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>:
>> > IceTransport.connectionState (type: RTCIceConnectionState)
>>
>> Shouldn't it be RTCIceTransportState?
>>
>>
>> > RTCDtlsTransport.transportState (type: RTCDtlsTransportState)
>>
>> Otherwise this should be:
>>
>> RTCDtlsTransport.connectionState (type: RTCDtlsConnectionState)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Iñaki Baz Castillo
>> <ibc@aliax.net>
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 August 2015 00:52:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:45 UTC