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

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

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:51:26 +0100
Message-Id: <B341372F-B5A9-4B8D-9C77-7E04D9FDEA6F@expway.fr>
Cc: Web APIs WG <public-webapi@w3.org>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>

On Mar 03, 2006, at 02:13, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> So you're suggesting that we make the argument required, but say  
> that implementations MAY make it optional?
> I would be probably be ok with that, but I don't quite see the  
> point with it since any feature we don't specifically forbid can be  
> added by any implementation.

Yes but some things that aren't forbidden are more encouraged to be  
added than others :)

I agree though that saying it MUST be there but you MAY make it  
optional doesn't make much sense, I like Maciej's suggestion of a  
SHOULD. It correctly conveys the idea that that's the correct  
behaviour, but if you have a good reason to go against it (say, the  
code was written before the WG that wrote the spec even existed) then  
you're fine (at least for the time being).

Robin Berjon
    Senior Research Scientist
    Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2006 10:51:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:20 UTC