- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 19:00:43 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16653
--- Comment #2 from Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org> 2012-05-02 19:00:42 UTC ---
More broadly, methods that are currently spec'd to take "any" arguments that
could be distinguished by WebIDL overloads should be, as this eliminates the
need for this spec to deal with conversions (e.g. is passing a JS number to a
function that takes a DOMString allowed or a TypeError?)
This does NOT apply to arguments which are keys (which is covered clearly in
the spec) or values (ditto, via HTML5 structured clone algorithm)
That leaves:
IDBDatabase.transaction(any storeNames, ...)
IDBObjectStore.createIndex(..., any keyPath, ...)
(plus IDB*Sync variants)
As an example where spec ambiguity could exist, the behavior of JS and
undefined and null values for is well covered by the WebIDL spec in the case of
db.createObjectStore(name, {keyPath: VALUE_IN_QUESTION}) but not in the case of
store.createIndex(name, VALUE_IN_QUESTION). Ensuring that the interpretation
the keyPath value in both methods is dictated by WebIDL seems highly desirable.
--
Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2012 19:00:46 UTC