Media Metadata API: Extract raw tags for audio/video.

Media Metadata API: Extract raw tags for audio/video.

This is the really simple implementation that can be refined if consumer wants it.

BUG=318450
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=261442

[tommycli, 2014-04-01 19:12:50]

thestig: Need review. Thanks!

[Lei Zhang, 2014-04-01 19:28:09]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extensions...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extensions...
chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl:126: object rawTags;
Maybe there is a better type for this? The extensions folks may know.

[tommycli, 2014-04-01 19:29:01]

yoz: I have a question on one of the extensions IDL fields. See Below:

https://codereview.chromium.org/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extensions...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/extensions...
chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl:126: object rawTags;
yoz: Is 'object' the right data type to use? I essentially a map<string, string>
with no pre-defined keys.

[tommycli, 2014-04-01 19:29:59]

scherkus: Need media/ OWNERs review. Thanks!

[scherkus (not reviewing), 2014-04-01 20:23:37]

media/ lgtm

but yeah ... string->string map / object seems a bit overly generic

[Yoyo Zhou, 2014-04-01 21:39:39]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/ext...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/ext...
chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl:126: object rawTags;
On 2014/04/01 19:29:01, tommycli wrote:
> yoz: Is 'object' the right data type to use? I essentially a map<string,
string>
> with no pre-defined keys.

I'm not that familiar with IDL. Adding asargent.

[asargent_no_longer_on_chrome, 2014-04-02 20:03:54]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/ext...
File chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/220303002/diff/20001/chrome/common/ext...
chrome/common/extensions/api/media_galleries.idl:126: object rawTags;
On 2014/04/01 19:29:01, tommycli wrote:
> yoz: Is 'object' the right data type to use? I essentially a map<string,
string>
> with no pre-defined keys.

Yeah, if you don't know the set of possible keys up front, it is appropriate to
use 'object'.

If there are some keys that you do know in advance and want to explicitly call
those out in documentation, but leave room for future expansion, one thing you
might do is:

dictionary Tags {
  long? foo;
  DOMSTRING? bar;
  object? additionalTags;
};


A better way to leave room for future expansion in WebIDL, that I think our
parser unfortunately does not currently support, would be:

interface Tags {
  attribute? long foo;
  attribute? DOMString bar;
}


This specifies the foo and bar attributes as things that are known in the
interface, but does not preclude additional named properties by objects
implementing the Tags interface. If adding this support sounds like fun, I'd be
happy to review CL's! But if you want to avoid the yak shave, going with just
object or the dictionary-with-embedded-object approaches are fine.

[tommycli, 2014-04-03 15:39:11]

The CQ bit was checked by tommycli@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-03 15:40:44]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/tommycli@chromium.org/220303002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-04-03 16:31:21]

Change committed as 261442