W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-intents@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Pick Contacts Intent

From: James Hawkins <jhawkins@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 09:59:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAO800SwB6nn2xSHQYwaca0dNWAVTMJ5fAuNvOZx2i0Gpz2J7kA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Cc: "<Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>" <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>, public-device-apis@w3.org, public-web-intents@w3.org
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:

> Hi Cathy,
>
> On Jun 27, 2012, at 23:41 , <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com> <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>
> wrote:
> > I notice that the ContactIntentExtras dictionary contains a fields item
> > which is DOMString[]. Meanwhile, the getExtra() method of Intent is
> spec'd
> > to return a DOMString.
>
> Whoa, good catch!
>
> > I suppose it would be necessary to modify the
> > getExtra() method to work with the dictionary definition (and to be more
> > flexible in general)? Say, returning any instead of DOMString?
>
> Actually, one thing that we discussed before (and that is pending on
> implementers telling us if it's actually possible — Greg had concerns that
> there may be issues) was just exposing an |extras| attribute instead of
> getExtra(). That attribute would contain all that was provided for extras,
> presumably filtered through structured cloning or some such.
>
> If doable, I personally much prefer that solution. Not to offend anyone,
> but using getExtra() to access what is most likely initially provided as an
> object literal feels very much Java-ish to me!
>
>
Agreed several times over!!


>  --
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 29 June 2012 17:00:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 29 June 2012 17:00:03 GMT