You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We shouldn't fire the mute event on an already muted track (track.muted == true).
We shouldn't fire the unmute event on an already unmuted track (track.muted == false).
This seems like a desirable property we should enforce in this spec. Yet we don't in the algorithm we expose, set a track's muted state (it allows firing an event regardless of existing state).
We already do so with similar algorithms like add a track and remove a track, so we probably should here as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We shouldn't fire the mute event on an already muted track (
track.muted == true
).We shouldn't fire the unmute event on an already unmuted track (
track.muted == false
).This seems like a desirable property we should enforce in this spec. Yet we don't in the algorithm we expose, set a track's muted state (it allows firing an event regardless of existing state).
We already do so with similar algorithms like add a track and remove a track, so we probably should here as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: