- 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