W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > March 2006

Re: No arguments to XMLHttpRequest.send (ACTION-58)

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 14:26:20 -0800
Message-ID: <4407710C.2050707@sicking.cc>
To: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>, Web APIs WG <public-webapi@w3.org>

Jim Ley wrote:
> "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
>> I actually think that we should make the spec require an argument for 
>> now. The whole purpose of this spec is to define what works across all 
>> browsers so that users know what they can do.
> 
> I am against there being different behaviour in different methods 
> defined by the Working Group, I'm open to the idea of always being 
> required, but in that situation, we should always require parameters, 
> having some methods e.g. .send( ) which you must specify null for and 
> others e.g. .open() that are optional is simply confusing to users.

Are users reading the spec or not, make up your mind ;)

I don't think this is something that will confuse users, but rather 
annoy them. Annoying API is aplenty in this spec though and something I 
think we'll have to live with.

> If the audience of the specification is users (which I don't think it 
> is) and we do require it then the spec also needs to have an answer to 
> the question of "why must I pass null?".    I don't think "buggy 
> implementations" is an answer to that.

While most authors won't read the spec I think some will. And more 
importantly, the copy-chain has to start somewhere, probably at a 
tutorial or reference site. And people writing those I'd think are more 
likely to look at the spec.

  >> Things like minor inconsistencies in what onreadystatechange
>> notifications are sent and how to resolve relative uris when several 
>> windows are involved are things that I'm fine with since it won't 
>> affect a lot of people. But send without argument would probably be 
>> used by a lot of people so that is a lot worse.
> 
> getAllResponseHeaders( )  / getResponseHeader are also used by a lot, 
> we're requiring them, yet many implementations don't have support.

I'd suspect not nearly as often as .send(). I believe safari was the 
only major browser that didn't support it, and if the safari team wants 
them removed for now I could live with that.

/ Jonas
Received on Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:24:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:53 GMT