W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2010


From: Devdatta Akhawe <dev.akhawe@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 00:54:57 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=EfKP3dyDmE7_WFZc917_GFQx4=f8n9ffH_BOc@mail.gmail.com>
To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Cc: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Darin Fisher <darin@chromium.org>, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
> 2) I've added two flavors of appendParameter.  The first flavor takes
> a DOMString for a value and appends a single parameter.  The second
> flavor takes an array of DOMStrings and appends one parameter for each
> array.  This seemed better than using a variable number of arguments.


I really want the setParameter method - appendParameter now requires
the developer to know what someone might have done in the past with
the URL object. this can be a cause of trouble as the web application
might do something that the developer doesn't expect , so I
specifically want the developer to opt-in to using appendParameters.

I know clearParameter is a method - but this is not the clear
separation between the '2 APIs' that we talked about earlier in the

I remember reading about how some web application frameworks combine
?q=a&q=b to q=ab at the server side, whereas some will only consider
q=a and some will only consider q=b. This is such a mess - the
developer should have to specifically opt-in to this.


> 3) I've added a clearParameter method.
> Defining these methods required some low-level URL manipulation that's
> not actually defined anywhere (AFAIK), so I've added a reference to my
> work-in-progress draft about parsing and canonicalizing URLs.
> Adam
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org> wrote:
>> appendParameter/clearParameter seems fine to me.
>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 2:53 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com> wrote:
>>> > Ok.  I'm sold on having an API for constructing query parameters.
>>> > Thoughts on what it should look like?  Here's what jQuery does:
>>> >
>>> > http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.get/
>>> >
>>> > Essentially, you supply a JSON object containing the parameters.  They
>>> > also have some magical syntax for specifying multiple instances of the
>>> > same parameter name.  I like the easy of supplying a JSON object, but
>>> > I'm not in love with the magical syntax.  An alternative is to use two
>>> > APIs, like we current have for reading the parameter values.
>>> jQuery's syntax isn't magical - the example they give using the query
>>> param name of 'choices[]' is doing that because PHP requires a [] at
>>> the end of the query param name to signal it that you want multiple
>>> values.  It's opaque, though - you could just as easily have left off
>>> the '[]' and it would have worked the same.
>>> The switch is just whether you pass an array or a string (maybe they
>>> support numbers too?).
>>> I recommend the method be called append*, so you can use it both for
>>> first sets and later additions (this is particularly useful if you're
>>> just looping through some data).  This obviously would then need a
>>> clear functionality as well.
>>> ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 08:04:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:11 UTC