- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:59:58 +0100
- To: public-webapps@w3.org, "Joseph Pecoraro" <pecoraro@apple.com>
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 21:51:12 +0100, Joseph Pecoraro <pecoraro@apple.com> wrote: > This gets especially hairy when the user + password parameters are > needed, and there is a "magic" boolean in the middle: > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest-2/#the-open-method > > Suggested values would be SYNC/ASYNC matching the spec's "async" boolean > name, or the longer SYNCHRONOUS/ASYNCHRONOUS. > > Is this something that would be considered, or is it so easy for authors > to make it clear, with comments or variable names, that it is not worth > it? Maybe I just need to remember what that boolean means! I think if we want to do this we should apply the design consistently. There's many methods that take a boolean. cloneNode(), addEventListener(), etc. Not really sure whether it is worth it. For the magic boolan scenario we could maybe overload the method even further and introduce this: void open(DOMString method, DOMString url, DOMString user); void open(DOMString method, DOMString url, DOMString user, DOMString? password); user would not be nullable here as that should probably be reserved for meaning async. Of course this would not address the problem when you want to use synchronous requests in workers, but so far synchronous requests seem to remain the rare case. Another disadvantage is that the above is not backwards compatible and cannot be detected. You could only figure it out via browser sniffing. But after a couple of years you would have a slightly easier way to make asynchronous requests. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Sunday, 27 February 2011 23:00:38 UTC