[Bug 11247] 7.1.3.4: I think it would be a good practice to throw a QUOTA_EXCEEDED_EXCEPTION just some seconds (i.e. 5s) BEFORE the QUOTA_EXCEEDED_ERR is thrown. This would give us a way to convict the script/data in a clean state with(out) or at least less corrupted

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11247

Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |ian@hixie.ch
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2010-12-29 08:17:12 UTC ---
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are
satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If
you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please
reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML
Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest
title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue
yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: In practice, things are rather more complicated. Quota could be hit
unexpectedly, or could be applied by the user at the user's whim. Or it could
be that the quota wasn't going to be exceeded, but the UA prompted the user to
let the user know the limit was being reached, and the user decided to deny
more quota to the site.

What we need here is implementation experience to learn what the typical
authoring patterns are, what the possible user interfaces are, and so on,
before we add more standard features in this area.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

Received on Wednesday, 29 December 2010 08:17:14 UTC