- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 18:25:00 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21740 Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |w3c@marcosc.com --- Comment #2 from Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> --- (In reply to comment #1) > I guess that, for things that return futures, you just reject the future > with the Error object as the reason. Yes, of course. But I guess what I am looking for is if we need to use any special wording, link to a concept (reject, in this case), or invoke some algorithm/method in the DOM spec. The sysapps WG is about to transition about 5 specs to use futures, so the Editors are looking for ways to phrase things correctly and link to the right bits in the spec. Like with "fire an event", the spec gives guidance on how to write and link to the correct parts of the DOM spec: "If the event needs its bubbles or cancelable attribute initialized, one could write "fire an event named submit with its cancelable attribute initialized to true"." What we are looking for is equivalent to the above "one could write ... blah" for using futures. Futures is new so we are still a bit timid about how to wire them up in a spec that needs to use them. Hope that makes sense (just trying to avoid getting yelled at: "you guys are doing it all wrong!!!"). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 18 April 2013 18:25:05 UTC