- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 21:41:55 +0100
- To: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: "Jeremy Orlow" <jorlow@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:59:37 +0100, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote: > In many of these cases other things than programming errors are likely > the cause of the error. In most of what you are listing network errors > are likely the most common source of errors. Yeah. (I got the list by searching for "named error" in the spec, which matched a bunch of stuff that fires error events, but the list is very likely not exhaustive.) > Note again that the IndexedDB errors we are talking about here are > semantically very similar to exceptions. The only reason we're not > making them exceptions is that we can't since exceptions would require > synchronous IO. So I would argue that consistency with exceptions is > more important that consistency with much of what you list above. OK. > That said, maybe we should fire window.onerror for many of the things > that you list above. Could you file a bug to that effect? > I'll repeat my question which you left > unanswered: > > What is the use case for window.onerror that you had in mind which > would require that we *don't* fire window.onerror for IndexedDB > errors? No use case for not doing it. I'm fine with doing it if there's a use case that warrants doing it, and we can keep the platform consistent with errors elsewhere. cheers -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Monday, 14 February 2011 20:42:32 UTC