W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: [XHR] Error flag

From: Kartikaya Gupta <lists.webapps@stakface.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 03:05:36 +0000
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <E1LAbsY-0000Ep-FV@bart.w3.org>

On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 16:28:25 +0100, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> 
> Actually, clearing it when you invoke send() should be enough. Made that  
> change to the editor drafts.
> 

I see the change in the XHR2 draft, but not the XHR draft.

> > Also, will the IDL be updated to reflect exceptions thrown from the  
> > various methods and property accessors? This may already be on the to-do  
> > list, but I thought I'd mention it in case it wasn't.
> 
> I was not planning on doing this. It makes the IDL unreadable in my  
> opinion and I believe it is not required in Web IDL (and if it is we  
> should change that :-)).
> 

It does hamper readability somewhat, but it also increases usefulness. I guess the question is whether the IDL is informative or normative. If it's normative, then I think the exceptions should be added for correctness. The [Null] and [Undefined] extended attributes are much worse for readability, IMO.

And on the topic of IDL, I assume you're sticking with your plan of not specifying a module/namespace?

Cheers,
kats
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2008 03:06:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:28 GMT