W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2012

Re: [IndexedDB] Checked in fix for ReSpec issue

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 06:59:01 -0700
To: "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com>, "Marcos Caceres" <w3c@marcosc.com>
Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Webapps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>
Message-ID: <op.wdqjsnvh64w2qv@annevk-macbookpro.local>
On Thu, 03 May 2012 01:34:12 -0700, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
> I strongly agree, but this is not Respec's fault. It's just a  
> particular(ly bad) editorial style adopted by some people. There is  
> nothing in Respec that prevents an editor from defining the algorithms  
> properly and then linking to them (as is done in HTML and DOM4).

Doesn't Respec encourage the style of

     Member description.

       Parameter description.

     Return value
       Return value description.

     Exception 1
       Exception 1 description.
     Exception 2
       Exception 2 description.

whereas what you really want is

The member(Parameters) method must run these steps:

   1. ...

   2. ... throw Exception 2 ...


This is why I tell people to use http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Anolis  

Anne van Kesteren
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 13:59:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 October 2015 13:55:50 UTC