Re: Things missing from Web IDL for HTML5

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Ian Hickson:
> > I updated HTML5 to use the new Web IDL stuff.
> 
> Great!  I notice you haven’t used nullable types for any of the
> DOMString arguments, attributes or return types.  Was that a conscious
> choice?
> 
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#idl-nullable-type
> 
> Bare DOMStrings now mean a type that doesn’t include the null value.

It was intentional in that I'm intentionally sticking my head in the sand 
about the whole DOMString/null/undefined issue at the moment, at least 
until either you finish the tests you were writing, or I get off my lazy 
behind and do it. :-)


BTW, is the following valid IDL? It seems to match the grammar, but I 
can't work out what it means:

   interface A {
     void ();
   };

(Or variations on the theme -- basically an operation with no specials and 
no identifier, and arbitrary return values and arguments.)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'