W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: [WebIDL] Default Values for Arguments

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:55:55 +0000 (UTC)
To: Steffen Krüssel <steffen.kruessel@googlemail.com>
Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0911302254230.2479@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Steffen Krüssel wrote:
> 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?!

Yes, [TreatNullAs] could also be handled this way. In fact, that's how I 
generally handle that particular case.

We could add syntax for default values also, I don't have a strong opinion 
either way. I was just trying to clarify the earlier e-mail.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 22:56:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:02 UTC