- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:11:25 +1300
- To: Erik Arvidsson <arv@chromium.org>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Erik Arvidsson: > The problem is that trying to get a non existing property in JS should > return undefined. Not null and not an empty string. I understand that > the spec used null since Java does not have undefined. Since we are > trying to realign these specs with the web it would make sense to try > to make them fit better with JavaScript and mandate that the JS > bindings for collections should return undefined for getting an item > out of bounds. Does it particularly matter that collection.item(999) returns null while collection['999'] evaluates to undefined? To me, it makes sense enough. Functions and properties that returns Nodes, and which have no Node to return, return null. I think for consistency with all of these other funtions and properties, it is preferable to return null from collection.item(). That’s a much bigger (better) consistency to strive for than one between collection.item(999) and collection['999'], IMO. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2010 01:12:02 UTC