W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: [WebIDL] Allowing specifications to opt in to throwing on sets of enumerated attributes to invalid values

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:33:25 -0800
Message-ID: <CADnb78ihdtLg11fD_mQBEWJzRLdh4i9jO59O74Tzr9RC3u49FQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> For example, PannerNode currently has this:
>
>     // Panning model
>     const unsigned short EQUALPOWER = 0;
>     const unsigned short HRTF = 1;
>     const unsigned short SOUNDFIELD = 2;
>
>     attribute unsigned short panningModel;
>
> and the desire is that bogus assignments to panningModel throw instead of
> silently being ignored, as I understand.
>
> There's similar stuff all over the spec ("type" on BiquadFilterNode and
> OscillatorNode are other examples, and there are lots more).

So https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/webaudio/specification.html
(is that the correct version?) does not state that these attributes
throw. It seems to state very little in terms of conformance criteria
in fact. But e.g. for panningModel I wonder why that is so different
from e.g. XMLHttpRequest.response or <canvas>'s 2d's miterLimit that
it requires throwing? Is that because the person writing the
specification simply disagrees with prior API art or is there a
legitimate reason?


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 16:33:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:07 UTC