- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:16:25 +1100
- To: WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Jonas Sicking: > An alternative would be to not mention behavior for undefined at all > and let it be whatever the default is for WebIDL once that spec makes > up its mind. It seems more important to me to behave consistently with > other methods than to have any specific behavior for undefined. That sounds like the better solution to me. Of course, that then makes it incumbent on me to finish those tests reasonably soon to determine what that default behaviour should be… -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Friday, 13 February 2009 00:17:01 UTC