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

Re: Promises - review of use in Network Service Discovery draft?

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:12:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDC_CjvTdL05pOLtErVfZH=rJF6qCGsXbrRjN70=abVd-w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Frederick Hirsch <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com>
Cc: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, public-device-apis <public-device-apis@w3.org>, Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:02 AM,  <Frederick.Hirsch@nokia.com> wrote:
> Dear list members (cc'd DAP):
>
> The Device API working group (DAP) is working on a specification 'Network Service Discovery'.
>
> "This specification defines a mechanism for an HTML document to discover and subsequently communicate with HTTP-based services advertised via common discovery protocols within the current network."
>
> <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/tip/discovery-api/Overview.html>
>
> Rich Tibbett, the editor, has updated the editors draft to use 'Promises' as noted in his message below.
>
> Would members of the list that have experience with Promises please (if possible) review the Promises usage in this editors draft and let the DAP WG know of any concerns or best practices that we need to consider (or confirm that our usage looks good)?

This is a rather late response, but the use of Promises appears fine
at first blush.

Use of integer constants is bad.  Make an enum with the values
instead, and have the error contain an attribute of that enum type.

I had a comment about not putting everything on navigator, but this
might actually be validly connected to the navigator.

~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 28 August 2013 18:13:24 UTC

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