W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] Constants and interfaces

From: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:58:56 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=kEp2i6yeicCeyNPV2FZW5voYsYv5opgwD6npM@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org>
Cc: public-webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Jeremy Orlow <jorlow@chromium.org> wrote:
> Last we spoke about constants in IndexedDB, (like IDBKeyRange.LEFT_BOUND) I
> believe we had decided that all the objects with constants would have an
> interface object hanging off of window so it's possible to simply say
> "IDBKeyRange.LEFT_BOUND" within JavaScript.  What happens when someone tries
> something like the following JS: |IDBCursor.continue()|?  Given that we're
> using an interface object, I'd assume we throw some sort of exception or
> something?  I tried to figure out the answer in the WebIDL spec (I imagine
> it's somewhere around
> here http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#dfn-interface-object) but it's a
> lot to wade through.  Any advice would be great.
> Also, the spec still has "[NoInterfaceObject]" for a lot of the interfaces.
>  I believe Nikunj did this by accident and was supposed to revert, but I
> guess he didn't?  I should file a bug to get these removed, right?
> Another question: Right now all the error constants are on
> IDBDatabaseException which is an exception rather than an interface.  Is
> this allowed?  And even if so, should we put them on IDBDatabaseError
> instead, given that it's the class people will be using more often (with the
> async interface)?  Or maybe we should duplicate the constants in both
> places?  It just feels weird to me that I keep reaching into
> IDBDatabaseException for these constants.

I wonder if it would make sense to group all constants into a separate
interface, which would have an interface object. The rest of the
interfaces would all be defined with [NoInterfaceObject]. What do you
think?

Thanks,
Andrei
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 17:59:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:40 GMT