- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:55:55 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- cc: public-script-coord@w3.org
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010, Cameron McCormack wrote: > > * new specs will define a new IDL exception for each exception to > define, rather than using DOMException (or a single new exception > type) and a number of exception codes IMHO using different codes is more important than using different interfaces since the usual pattern is just to check e.code in the handler. Having to check e.code and the interface type makes things twice as complicated. Having to make sure all the spec writers for Web platform specs communicate is *not a bug*. It's absolutely imperative not just for making sure exception codes don't overlap (something that really hasn't been much of a problem in practice since we have a de-facto registry that we use for the purpose) but simply for making sure the platform remains sane! I think it would be a mistake to make it easier for Web platform spec writers to isolate themselves from the rest of the ecosystem. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 20 December 2010 19:56:25 UTC