- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:56:28 -0700
- To: Christophe Jolif <cjolif@ilog.fr>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
Christophe Jolif wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > There is something I still don't get with abort and XHR state. We saw > that we think the state after an abort must be 4 == loaded. Given that, > as a listener on the request, how can I know if a request has been > aborted or has been loaded? As far as I can see, I can't. And it seems > to me like an important missing feature. If that is indeed true we need to fix it I agree. Is there a sensible value we could set .status to for example? > If I'm not missing something, I really think this 4 state is misleading > as it doesn't necessarly mean "loaded" as the current spec is stating. > It means either "loaded" or "aborted". > > I understand that we currently try to map to actual implementations and > so we can't do much about it however we should try not to forbid future > improvements in that area. So we should consider how future improvements > could fit with the spec we are writing. The reason is that there might be content out there that depends on it. > If we say abort() just reset the object (we don't talk about state > change event), then we will have the chance in the future to add a new > ABORTED state. > > If we say we go to 4. Then no chance to add that. Even if we say 'just reset' there is no way to add it later IMHO. I don't see this as a problem either way though since we shouldn't design the next revision around readystatechange but rather around other solutions. readystatechange is a pretty poor design anyway. > In that case I would strongly argue that 4 description must be changed > from LOADED to something like COMPLETED (described as loading happened > or object has been aborted). And then we might add one day an > isAborted() method or something like that on XHR to make the distinction > between the two COMPLETED sub-state. That might not be a bad idea. Though hopefully .status could be that distiction. / Jonas
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2006 20:56:38 UTC