- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 13:45:01 +0200
- To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: "Laurens Holst" <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>, public-webapi@w3.org
On Mon, 26 May 2008 13:09:02 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >>> But if it doesn't, it shouldn't do anything that a non-null argument >>> would do. >> Why not? In nearly every JS API that takes a string, the JS value null >> is either treated the same as the empty string, or the same as the >> string "null". > > That may be true for JavaScript, but not for other programming languages. > > Imposing a JS-ish API on an interface that should work for more than JS > seems to be a bad idea to me. Other programming languages can pick a much better API for HTTP requests. I added "It is the ECMAScript HTTP API." to the introduction. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Monday, 26 May 2008 11:46:51 UTC