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

Re: Removing syntaxerror for ice candidates

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 12:09:45 +0200
Message-ID: <559E4869.1060105@alvestrand.no>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-webrtc@w3.org
Den 09. juli 2015 11:25, skrev Dominique Hazael-Massieux:
> On 09/07/2015 10:47, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> * there is no definition of what it means for an ICE candidate to be
>>> malformed (the RFC doesn't define such a term)
>>
>> I think you're right. Syntax errors should be caught when constructing
>> the RTCIceCandidate from the string, not when pushing the
>> RTCIceCandidate into the PC.
>>
>> But the error should be SyntaxError, and it should happen whenever the
>> candidate doesn't conform to the IceCandidate ABNF in the RFC.
> 
> Note that the ABNF is a superset of what a meaninful candidate can be;
> in other words, there are plenty of room to write ABNF-compliant
> candidate parameters that can't be used in the end.
> 
>> Where is it appropriate to say that this is a requirement on the
>> RTCIceCandidate constructor? (and is this indeed appropriate?)
> 
> I'd be OK with failing on construction, but I'm not sure what this would
> gain us?
> 
>>> * no browser seems to be doing this at the moment
>>
>> It definitely fails on adding to the PC, not on construction. (Chrome 43)
> 
> It does fail, but not with a SyntaxError (which is what I'm suggesting
> we remove).

So you're suggesting we remove the SyntaxError, but continue failing ...
what are you suggesting we use as a failure instead?

I'm much happier with proposing "change error code X to Y in case W"
than with "remove SytaxError".
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2015 10:10:18 UTC

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