- From: Steffen Krüssel <steffen.kruessel@googlemail.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:39:49 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org
- Message-ID: <e29a0b640911270039n44933ba7mb9310bcaa5c82935@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Ian, If I understand you right, it should be enough to put a descriptive text on the appropriate method in order to indicate what the actual requirements for an implementation are (e.g. default value if left out)? But then most of the implementation-relevant requirements could be put into the interface's documentation rather than specified formally. For example, [TreatNullAs] could also be documented informal, can't it? So if I didn't get anything wrong, the question is which directives are specified (in)formal?! Regards, Steffen 2009/11/24 Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> > On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Steffen Krüssel wrote: > > 2009/11/13 Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> > > > > > > I think you want something like: > > > > > > interface textbox { > > > void setText(in DOMString text, in optional unsigned long long > color); > > > } > > > > > > When the color argument is omitted, the default value of black/0 must > > > be used. > > > > I don't think that the "optional" attribute is sufficient as this does > not > > (formally) specifies what is being implicitly done in that case (i.e. > using > > a default value). > > It's not just "optional", it's also the text after the interface, saying > what the requirements on the implementations are. > > -- > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >
Received on Friday, 27 November 2009 08:40:28 UTC