Re: [IndexedDB] Reason for aborting transactions

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Jeremy Orlow <> wrote:
> We do that as well.
> What's the best way to do it API wise?  Do we need to add an
> IDBTransactionError object with error codes and such?

I don't actually know. I can't think of a precedence. Usually you use
different error codes for different errors, but here we want to
distinguish a particular type of error (aborts) into several sub

To make this more complicated, I actually think we're going to end up
having to change a lot of error handling when things are all said and
done. Error handling right now is sort of a mess since DOM exceptions
are vastly different from JavaScript exceptions. Also DOM exceptions
have a messy situation of error codes overlapping making it very easy
to confuse a IDBDatabaseException with a DOMException with an
overlapping error code.

For details, see

So my gut feeling is that we'll have to revamp exceptions quite a bit
before we unprefix our implementation. This is very unfortunate, but
shouldn't be as big deal of a deal as many other changes as most of
the time people don't have error handling code. Or at least not error
handling code that differentiates the various errors.

Unfortunately we can't make any changes to the spec here until WebIDL
prescribes what the new exceptions should look like :(

So to loop back to your original question, I think that the best way
to expose the different types of aborts is by adding a .reason (or
better named) property which returns a string or enum which describes
the reason for the abort.

/ Jonas

Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 03:37:32 UTC