W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: [indexeddb] Do we need to support keyPaths with an empty string?

From: Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:17:37 +0100
To: "jsbell@chromium.org" <jsbell@chromium.org>, "Jonas Sicking (jonas@sicking.cc)" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Israel Hilerio" <israelh@microsoft.com>
Cc: "Adam Herchenroether" <aherchen@microsoft.com>, "David Sheldon" <dsheldon@microsoft.com>, "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.v8bqrnbe49xobu@odinho>
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:16:29 +0100, Israel Hilerio <israelh@microsoft.com>  
wrote:

> Given the different behaviors, I wonder if the use case you described  
> below (i.e. set scenario) is worth supporting.  Not supporting keyPath =  
> undefined, null, and “” seem to provide a more consistent and clean  
> story.  Returning an exception when a developer creates an Object Store  
> with a keyPath of null, undefined, or empty string will provide a  
> FailFast API.
>
> What do you think?

I prefer this option.

Making the throw and the cause of it closer. It feels more consistent, and  
requires less understanding of all details of IDB to understand. Web  
authors doesn't always read the spec faithfully.

-- 
Odin Hørthe Omdal · Core QA, Opera Software · http://opera.com /
Received on Thursday, 19 January 2012 09:18:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT