Re: Possible Constraint Syntax Compromise

Peter Thatcher wrote:
> Out of those three, all the people I talked to preferred #3, which is
> why I have proposed it.  If there is something we are all missing about
> WebIDL that gives an easier exit from this conundrum, that would be
> welcome news.

No, it does not surprise me this is not expressible in WebIDL, so I 
guess it will not throw an exception. But we're still required by 
contract to call either the success or error callback, and what it 
sounded like you were saying was that the browser was free to ignore the 
constraint completely and return success.

Received on Wednesday, 21 May 2014 01:17:52 UTC