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 GMT

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