W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: ByteString in Web IDL

From: Norbert Lindenberg <ecmascript@lindenbergsoftware.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 23:01:37 -0700
Cc: Norbert Lindenberg <ecmascript@lindenbergsoftware.com>, public-script-coord <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-Id: <CC9BA36E-7810-4F95-9B4E-3CF657069A13@lindenbergsoftware.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>

On Jul 9, 2013, at 22:17 , Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 7/10/13 1:01 AM, Jonas Sicking wrote:
>>> 
>>> This is not true. It would be possible to describe behavior in prose too.
>> 
>> Maybe if you declare it as 'any' in the IDL, I guess....
> 
> Or DOMString.

Which is what the XMLHttpRequest spec did before ByteString came along:
https://github.com/whatwg/xhr/commit/cbbc56ab2dc5049eb59c69f760038d62b3439cca

Changing to ByteString caused a semantic change in XMLHttpRequest: Before the change, to "deflate a DOMString into a byte sequence" was defined as using the low-order byte of each code point, so that "ぇぅご" and "🍇🍅🍔" would be equivalents of "GET". Using ByteString, these should now result in TypeError exceptions. (IE 9 actually sends requests specified as method "ぇぅご", others report a variety of errors, none a TypeError).

But that's probably not what you meant by "impossible"?

Norbert
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 06:02:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:50 UTC