Inline -----Original Message----- > From: Andrei Popescu [mailto:andreip@google.com] > > Hi Shyam, > > <snip /> > > Would these suffice, or do you see reasons why we would want to have > more detailed errors? Specifically, I'm wondering about "TimeOut" and > the bubbling of HTTP response codes. To me, these all mean roughly the > same thing: there was something wrong with the network location > provider. I think TimeOut is important - Consumers of the API can check this and present end-users with a "Try again" option or auto-retry, etc. Note that this scenario is different from say, NotFound or a generic error. Bubbling up service error codes would be a _huge_ help for debugging (imagine life as a programmer if these were hidden). I don't anticipate consumers of the API using these to determine end user experience though. Pseudo code for error handling may look like: void errorCallback(positionError) { debug.assert(positionError != null); switch(positionError.id) { case 1: case 3: // AccessDenied or NotFound // Continue without location information ... break; case 2: // TimeOut // Prompt user to re-try or abort... break; #if(DEBUG) case 401: case 402: case 403: case 404: case 500: case 503: // Service errors // Do debug only stuff... break; #endif default: // UnhandledException // Do something sensible } } Furthermore, given that errors are handled in callbacks, I take back my suggestion to throw on unhandled errors. Thanks shyamReceived on Monday, 28 July 2008 21:22:49 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 August 2009 20:54:07 GMT