Re: RTCStatsType value for datachannel stata

> On Jan 15, 2015, at 4:15 PM, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 15 January 2015 at 13:06, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote:
>> On 1/15/15 1:54 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>>> On a related topic to this, I think we should change this from an enum to
>>> a string because of the issues where we can't extent an enum in webIDL
>> 
>> I believe we're only in trouble if we take RTCStatsType as input somewhere,
>> I don't think we do.
> 
> Yes.  The hack for constraints was necessary to allow applications to
> provide input values that the browser wasn't ready for yet in specific
> contexts.  There, we didn't want the browser to fail immediately
> because the values there are sort-of-guidelines.  RTCStatsType is pure
> output, so no issue there.

Agree with that but I'm unaware of the WebIDL to extend an existing enum when someone defines a new output type in a new spec a few years from now.  Particularly when multiple specs extend the same enum.