W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: [IndexedDB] Behavior of IDBObjectStore.get() and IDBObjectStore.delete() when record doesn't exist

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:56:55 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTim0gHhCP8jphdc6NwdKWJ7LHwrcAt9TKru2vX5-@mail.gmail.com>
To: Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
>>> Similar to Kris, I think worrying about 'undefined' is worrying about
>>> an edge case. Simplicity is better than trying to cove every possible
>>> edge case.
>> I thought edge cases are precisely what a specification is supposed to deal
>> with.
> A spec can never cover 100% of all use cases. Often covering the last
> 10-20% of the use cases adds as much complexity or API surface, if not
> more, as covering the first 80-90%. The trick really is to know when
> to stop.

Oh, I should be more clear. The spec definitely needs to *define* all
edge cases though. In general the spec currently tries to very
precisely define behavior in all edge cases, including this one. I
also added a "note" pointing out this very edge case as well as
suggest using openCursor as a workaround.

If you do find other cases which are not explicitly defined, please do
file bugs or send emails to this list.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 00:57:48 UTC

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