Sending this out again as no one commented and I think we should fix. The docs indicates that Media error callback returns a MediaError object with a code and message parameter. In unified JS we are only returning a code parameter.
iOS DID pass back a MediaError object in the Media.onStatus value parameter that included a message. I'd like to update the unified JS code to maintain the message by passing back a MediaError object as the value paremter for status of MEDIA_ERROR. If I do this Android will need to update. any objections? -becky On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Becky Gibson <[email protected]>wrote: > Maybe I should work my way through all of the issues in an object before > posting! > > The functionality of media.onStatus has changed (at least for iOS). The > unified version takes an id, message type, and value. Message type is a > MEDIA.code identifying the type of message - Media.MEDIA_STATE, etc. The > behavior that has changed is for Media.MEDIA_ERROR. The MediaError object > has a code and message parameter. In the Unified JS version, the message > parameter is lost as it assumes the value input into onStatus is a media > error code: > > else if (msg === Media.MEDIA_ERROR) { > > if (media.errorCallback) { > > media.errorCallback({"code":value}); > > } > > } > > Previously, iOS was passing back a MediaError object as the value > parameter with code and message values. > > else if (msg == Media.MEDIA_ERROR) { > > if (media.errorCallback) { > > media.errorCallback(value); // value is a MediaError object > > } > > } > > I believe that an onStatus call with a msg parameter with a value of > Media.MEDIA_ERROR should be passing back a MediaError object as the value > parameter. This allows the device to pass back a more detailed error > message. If you want to avoid having to modify the Android code we could > add an additional parameter to the onStatus method to allow the error > message to be provided and update the else if (msg == Media.MEDIA_ERROR) > clause to include it in the MediaError object if it was available. > > What is the preferred way to resolve this? > > > thanks, > > -becky > > > > >
