Re: [web-nfc] Should NFCPushOptions.timeout be an implementation-dependent value or defined?

Calling out the meaning of `Infinity` explicitly would be good. It is 
used elsewhere on the Web Platform too to refer to a value that is 
unbound, and explicitly defined as such. Similarly, we could clarify 
the meaning of the value `0`.

Also as suggested by @zolkis we should clarify the failure bahavior if
 the UA cannot respect the timeout defined by the web developer. The 
note following this step should be clarified to explicitly say that 
out of bounds timeout value is another valid reason for termination at
 this step:

> An implementation may reject promise with "NotSupportedError", and 
abort these steps.

> NOTE
> The UA might terminate message push at this point. The reasons for 
terminations are implementation details. For example, the user could 
have has set a preference to allow a given origin only to read, write,
 or send data to peers. Also, the implementation might be unable to 
support the operation requested.

[1]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/dap/raw-file/default/battery/Overview.html

-- 
GitHub Notif of comment by anssiko
See https://github.com/w3c/web-nfc/issues/49#issuecomment-140677146

Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2015 09:00:16 UTC