- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 15:14:29 -0800
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: >> I would probably go even further and say that having string arguments >> that default to something other than the empty string, or numeric >> arguments default to something other than 0, or objects that default to >> something other than null, in cases where empty string/0/null is valid >> values, seems like a bad idea to me. > > That too. > > However, lest we decide therefore to make such things invalid in WebIDL... I don't think we should make it illegal in WebIDL. Like you say, there are situations when using a non-empty string actually makes for a less surprising API. Additionally, there likely will be situations where an empty string won't be a valid value, but where we can't use enums. Mime types is a good example of this. Likewise I could imagine APIs which take numeric values greater than 0. Here too 0 would be an invalid value even if we use a numeric type in WebIDL. I could potentially see forbidding boolean values defaulting to true though. / Jonas
Received on Friday, 15 November 2013 23:15:27 UTC