W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-device-apis@w3.org > February 2012

Re: [vibration] Exceptions no longer exist in WebIDL

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 14:54:56 +0100
Cc: public-device-apis@w3.org
Message-Id: <E937B00A-6785-4F16-8D42-2D61E7E1F625@berjon.com>
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
On Feb 9, 2012, at 09:53 , Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
> Le mercredi 08 février 2012 à 22:29 +0100, Robin Berjon a écrit :
>>> ve updated ReSpec to now completely ignore WebIDL
>> raises/getraises/setraises in such a manner that it doesn't cause
>> failure but it simply outputs nothing for them. This ought to
>> magically fix the ED before next publication 
> 
> Note that the "magic fix" is a bit misleading — if you do intend to send
> an exception, you actually need to add text in the prose to that end.
> I'm not sure that getting the exception to simply disappear makes it
> clear enough to the editors that they actually need to modify their
> spec.

Yes, but the problem is 1) we can't reach all editors currently using ReSpec (I did warn spec-prod) and 2) I don't want to suddenly start injecting errors in specs that were fine not long ago. My plan is to use the magic for a few weeks to give people time to adjust, then start emitting warnings, and later make it a parsing error.

>> (but it's true that it's a LC comment that needs disposing of — not
>> sure if it's a simple bug or a substantial issue, kind of on the
>> fence).
> 
> If we still intend the API to raise a DOMError exception, this is clear
> a pure editorial fix; if we remove the exception, then that is probably
> more on the substantive side of things.

Then I believe we're all good!

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 13:55:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 14:53:52 UTC