- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 11:12:44 +0100
- To: "Cameron McCormack" <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: public-script-coord@w3.org
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 03:16:06 +0100, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
wrote:
> On 20/10/11 1:25 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Strings are intrinsically meaningful and therefore have no need for
>> constants in APIs for the platform. See XMLHttpRequest.responseType and
>> the <canvas> 2D API for examples. We should remove string constants so
>> people (e.g. public-web-perf) will not use them and introduce
>> inconsistent APIs.
>
> This sounds like an argument against string constants used for enum-like
> values. (We already convinced the Web Perf folks not to use string
> constants in this case.) What about something like:
>
> interface A {
> const DOMString HTMLNS = "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";
> };
>
> There are no string constants currently like this (a convenience because
> people have difficulty remembering such strings), so my question is
> whether we want to disallow them.
I would expect if we ever decide on some API that needs to work with the
HTML/SVG/MathML namespaces we would use simple prefixes for them. E.g.
"svg:svg", "html:a", etc. I'm personally not convinced at least that
namespaces are a good use case for string constants. And since there is no
such API currently we can always add this feature later may the need arise.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 9 December 2011 10:13:36 UTC