Updating text on whether context object is allowed to request access. #427
Conversation
stefhak
force-pushed
the
allowusermedia
branch
from
664a4b0 to
36c8de1
Compare
|
@annevk can you say if this text looks appropriate? |
|
As I said in the referenced issue, @zcorpan is changing how this works. If we make But overall this looks okay, except that "this context object" should just be "context object". |
| @@ -3578,8 +3576,14 @@ | |||
| succeed.</p> | |||
| </li> | |||
| <li> | |||
| <p>If the current [[!HTML51]] Document's <a>user media | |||
| enabled flag</a> is unset, return a promise rejected with a | |||
| <p>If this <a href="https://dom.spec.whatwg.org/#context-object"> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should say
If the current settings object's responsible document is not allowed to use the feature indicated by attribute name allowusermedia, then throw a "SecurityError" DOMException.
See https://w3c.github.io/browser-payment-api/#constructor
(In particular, MediaDevices is not a node, so "node document" is undefined.)
The allowed to use check needs to be in navigator.getUserMedia() as well, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
navigator.getUserMedia() is a shell around navigator.mediaDevices.getUserMedia(), so no.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@zcorpan I like your proposal to use "settings object" and "responsible document" rather than "context object" and "node document".
One thing I was thinking about when doing this though was if we (some time) would allow a worker to use gUM. Would it still be clear what the "responsible document" is?
|
I updated as proposed by @zcorpan in https://github.com/w3c/mediacapture-main/pull/427/files/36c8de191cef114cf52964b3e35d2f2cb6140d47#r95865625 with except for that I kept it at returning a rejected promise rather than throwing (we did discuss and agree that is the right way, right?). |
|
Oops. Yeah that was sloppy copy-paste on my part. |
| <p>The term <dfn><a href="https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/embedded-content.html#allowed-to-use"> | ||
| allowed to use</a></dfn> is defined in WHATWG (note we don't have a proper | ||
| ref added, in addition it seems HTML5.1 will(?) add defintion | ||
| of this term).</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggest removing parenthesis before merging.
| allowed to use</a></dfn> is defined in WHATWG (note we don't have a proper | ||
| ref added, in addition it seems HTML5.1 will(?) add defintion | ||
| of this term).</p> | ||
| allowed to use</a></dfn> is defined in WHATWG.</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should probably say WHATWG HTML
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, added that.
A first attempt on #268.