W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: [WebIDL] Default Values for Arguments

From: Steffen Krüssel <steffen.kruessel@googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:39:49 +0100
Message-ID: <e29a0b640911270039n44933ba7mb9310bcaa5c82935@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org
Hi Ian,

If I understand you right, it should be enough to put a descriptive text on
the appropriate method in order to indicate what the actual requirements for
an implementation are (e.g. default value if left out)?

But then most of the implementation-relevant requirements could be put into
the interface's documentation rather than specified formally. For example,
[TreatNullAs] could also be documented informal, can't it? So if I didn't
get anything wrong, the question is which directives are specified
(in)formal?!

Regards, Steffen

2009/11/24 Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

> On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Steffen Krüssel wrote:
> > 2009/11/13 Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
> > >
> > > I think you want something like:
> > >
> > >   interface textbox {
> > >     void setText(in DOMString text, in optional unsigned long long
> color);
> > >   }
> > >
> > >   When the color argument is omitted, the default value of black/0 must
> > >   be used.
> >
> > I don't think that the "optional" attribute is sufficient as this does
> not
> > (formally) specifies what is being implicitly done in that case (i.e.
> using
> > a default value).
>
> It's not just "optional", it's also the text after the interface, saying
> what the requirements on the implementations are.
>
> --
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
>
Received on Friday, 27 November 2009 08:40:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:02 UTC