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

Define key ID sort order #69

Closed
ddorwin opened this issue Jul 7, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@ddorwin
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 7, 2015

The fix for #39 added the text "sorted by key ID."

Since a key ID is just an array of bytes, we should clarify what it means to be sorted by key ID. Are bytes compared from byte 0 to N or N to 0? What if the key IDs have different lengths?

This also depends on defining the representation (#68).

@ddorwin

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Jul 20, 2015

We should probably address #75 first.

@ddorwin ddorwin added the blocked label Jul 20, 2015

@ddorwin ddorwin modified the milestone: V1 Oct 20, 2015

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 18, 2015

FWIW, I'm implementing Firefox's key ID sort order to copy Chromium's MediaKeyStatusMap::MapEntry::compareLessThan, i.e. just do a memcmp on the keyIDs' bytes.

@mwatson2

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Nov 20, 2015

I think we could address this one independently of #75, since we will need to specify an order either way. I propose adding the following to the current "sorted by Key ID":

"where for Key IDs A and B of lengths n and m respectively with n <= m then we define A < B if and only if the first n octets of A are less in lexicographical order than the first n octets of B or those octets are equal and n < m."

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 24, 2015

Sounds good to me.

@mwatson2

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Feb 8, 2016

If there are no further comments on this issue, I will implement my proposal above.

@mwatson2 mwatson2 self-assigned this Feb 8, 2016

@mwatson2 mwatson2 closed this in 76c54ae Feb 9, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.