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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Maybe we shouldn't hog overly generic interface names? #199

Closed
jan-ivar opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #330
Closed

Maybe we shouldn't hog overly generic interface names? #199

jan-ivar opened this issue Feb 16, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #330
Assignees
@jan-ivar
Labels
Ready for PR
Milestone
Minimum viable ship

Comments

@jan-ivar
Copy link
Member

This spec grabs a few generic-sounding interface names that do not seem generic at all, like SendStream, ReceiveStream, and BidirectionalStream, none of which have constructors. They're visible on window; other specs wouldn't be able to reuse them.

Compare to e.g. RTCRtpScriptTransform in other specs.

Should we perhaps prefix these? What prefix would we use? WebTransportSendStream? WTSendStream?
@jan-ivar jan-ivar changed the title Maybe don't hog overly generic interface names Maybe we shouldn't hog overly generic interface names? Feb 17, 2021
@wilaw wilaw added the Discuss at next meeting Flags an issue to be discussed at the next WG working label Feb 24, 2021
@jan-ivar jan-ivar mentioned this issue Mar 30, 2021
Closed
@jan-ivar jan-ivar self-assigned this Mar 30, 2021
@wilaw wilaw removed the Discuss at next meeting Flags an issue to be discussed at the next WG working label Apr 13, 2021
@jan-ivar jan-ivar added this to the Minimum viable ship milestone May 26, 2021
@yutakahirano
Copy link
Contributor

I tend to agree. Given the name doesn't matter for people other than spec writers and spec readers, maybe prefixing with WebTransport is better than prefixing with WT.

@yutakahirano yutakahirano added the Discuss at next meeting Flags an issue to be discussed at the next WG working label Jul 15, 2021
@jan-ivar
Copy link
Member Author

jan-ivar commented Aug 3, 2021 •
edited

Meeting:

  • Go with WebTransportBidirectionalStream and WebTransportDatagramDuplexStream

@jan-ivar jan-ivar added Ready for PR and removed Discuss at next meeting Flags an issue to be discussed at the next WG working labels Aug 3, 2021
yutakahirano added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 17, 2021
@yutakahirano
Prefix BidirectionalStream and DatagramDuplexStream with WebTransport
acadba9 
Fixes #199.
@yutakahirano yutakahirano mentioned this issue Aug 17, 2021
Merged
yutakahirano added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 17, 2021
@yutakahirano
Prefix BidirectionalStream and DatagramDuplexStream with WebTransport
0ed17d6 
Fixes #199.
yutakahirano added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 18, 2021
@yutakahirano
Prefix BidirectionalStream and DatagramDuplexStream with WebTransport
9252281 
Fixes #199.
yutakahirano added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 18, 2021
@yutakahirano
Prefix BidirectionalStream and DatagramDuplexStream with WebTransport (…
f0d9aa6 
…#330)

Fixes #199.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@jan-ivar jan-ivar

Labels
Ready for PR
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Minimum viable ship
3 participants
@wilaw @jan-ivar @yutakahirano