"Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com> wrote: > On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:07:16 +0200, Stewart Brodie > <stewart.brodie@antplc.com> wrote: > > I don't think that introducing a new event for each (currently known!) > > response code is a good idea. Use the readystatechange event instead. > > It's not about currently known. It's about response codes for which the > XMLHttpRequest object has special behavior. That's a limited range of > response codes (listed in my opening post). Are you seriously considering special casing each individual response code as and when a case is made for it being useful for the client? I think that to do that is just asking for ongoing trouble. Just make it generic: create a new event if you don't want to re-use the already overburdened, overloaded and Byzantine readystatechange event. It'll be easier to implement and forward compatible, so the problem'll be solved for all time. -- Stewart Brodie Software Engineer ANT Software LimitedReceived on Monday, 6 August 2007 14:29:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:58 GMT