W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Should ByteString be a serializable type?

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:26:47 -0800
Message-ID: <52E6CF17.6000205@mcc.id.au>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
CC: Norbert Lindenberg <ecmascript@lindenbergsoftware.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> To be fair, XMLHttpRequest's definition predates the existence of
> serializable bits in WebIDL. I agree that it probably _shouldn't_ be
> serializable (though likely is in WebKit/Blink because of how they
> implement attributes), so the issue is somewhat unimportant at the
> moment, but figured I would check in case someone defines an interface
> which uses ByteString but does want to be serializable (e.g. an object
> representing a subset of HTTP response headers or something).

It's simple to add support for ByteString to be serializable to the 
spec, so I've just done that.

https://github.com/heycam/webidl/commit/59191592431ebf7496b720ca7756f88ef4b24d33
Received on Monday, 27 January 2014 21:27:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:37:51 UTC