Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issue#15 - use alternative API design to replace the old methods. #16

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 10, 2022

Conversation

alastor0325
Copy link
Collaborator

Based on the discussion in issue#15, use new API design, navigator.getAutoplayPolicy(ctor) and navigator.getAutoplayPolicy(object), to replace the old API design.

Use `navigator.getAutoplayPolicy(ctor)` and `navigator.getAutoplayPolicy(object)` to replace the old API design.
Copy link

@tjenkinson tjenkinson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm!

index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Show resolved Hide resolved
index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
partial interface Navigator {
AutoplayPolicy getAutoplayPolicy(HTMLMediaElementConstructor ctor);

AutoplayPolicy getAutoplayPolicy(AudioContextConstructor ctor);
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One problem I would like to discuss here is, if a web developer passes a contructor which is not HTMLMediaElementConstructor and AudioContextConstructor, should we throw an exception?

Same problem for query-by-a-element case as well, if a web developer passes other elements which we don't support.

…agent to pause media element after element becomes audible.
@alastor0325 alastor0325 linked an issue Jan 3, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request
@alastor0325 alastor0325 self-assigned this Jan 3, 2022
@alastor0325
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hello, @chrisguttandin @liberato-at-chromium, just want to confirm with y'all to see if y'all have any suggestion on this new version update?

In addition, @chrisn, sorry because I'm still not familiar with the working flow on Media Working Group. I would like to know if there is any convention that how many reviewers I would need for a PR?

Thank y'all so much.

@tidoust
Copy link
Member

tidoust commented Jan 6, 2022

In addition, @chrisn, sorry because I'm still not familiar with the working flow on Media Working Group. I would like to know if there is any convention that how many reviewers I would need for a PR?

In general, as spec editor, you should feel empowered to merge a PR whenever you feel that it can be merged. This is in line with the decision section in the Media WG charter. Merging a PR does not set things in stone in any case and I think it's totally reasonable to iterate on small increments.

Besides, this spec has not yet been published to /TR, so it only exists as an Editor's Draft for now (which essentially means that it's yours ;))

If you'd rather get a more explicit signal from the Media WG, you could put it on the agenda for next week's meeting for instance.

@alastor0325
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thank @tidoust! If so, I will merge this PR by the end of this week if no one disagrees with that, which leaves some time in order anyone wants to raise any new feedback.

In addition, after merging this PR, I will open another issue to discuss the problem I mentioned in this.

index.bs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@chrisn
Copy link
Member

chrisn commented Jan 10, 2022

In addition, @chrisn, sorry because I'm still not familiar with the working flow on Media Working Group. I would like to know if there is any convention that how many reviewers I would need for a PR?

I agree with @tidoust's comments. You're welcome to merge the PR when you think it's ready. We can get review from Working Group members as a separate step, again, when you're ready.

@liberato-at-chromium
Copy link

Hello, @chrisguttandin @liberato-at-chromium, just want to confirm with y'all to see if y'all have any suggestion on this new version update?

sorry for the late reply -- lgtm.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Alternate API design
6 participants