- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 08:37:19 -0800
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- CC: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On 11/15/12 8:33 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > So https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/audio/raw-file/tip/webaudio/specification.html > (is that the correct version?) Such as it is, yes. > does not state that these attributes > throw. It seems to state very little in terms of conformance criteria > in fact. Yup. What's there is a mess. It's being worked on, and this is one of the desired clarifications. Note that I'm more interested in having this use enum than in it throwing per se, myself, but I'm not the spec editor here. > Is that because the person writing the > specification simply disagrees with prior API art That's one reason it's an uphill battle to get them to use WebIDL enum in the first place, yes. > or is there a legitimate reason? Frankly, I think the prior API art here is broken, and I think the WebAudio spec editors think that too. Now obviously for existing APIs that's water under the bridge... -Boris
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 16:37:55 UTC