Re: ConstrainDOMStringParameters would be good riddance

On 9/26/14 4:17 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>
>>> But losing the ability to express a particular semantic.
>>
>> Which one?
>
> |
> { foo: { ideal: ["fifth", "fourth"] } } | advanced: [
>                                           |   { foo: ["fifth", 
> "fourth"] } ]
> |
> | or
> |
> |{ foo: ["fifth", "fourth",
>       |           "third", "second",
> |"first"]} // e.g. all
> |
>
>
>
> Using advanced would express the semantic correctly, I think, but the 
> other alternative requires the client to enumerate all possibilities, 
> which means that nasty things could happen if the implementation adds 
> an alternative the client did not expect.
>
> (The client can find what values are possible using capabilities. This 
> requires additional code.)

Good point. I had some other points but I'm tabling them as you've 
convinced me this is not without problems (I don't want to rely on 
advanced).

.: Jan-Ivar :.