- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 05:18:26 +0000
- To: public-webapps@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16312 Summary: use of undocumented 'switch' convention for rule formulation is ambiguous Product: WebAppsWG Version: unspecified Platform: All URL: http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/xhr/raw-file/8d4e9ccfdbd4/Overvi ew.html#infrastructure-for-the-send()-method OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: XHR AssignedTo: annevk@opera.com ReportedBy: glenn@skynav.com QAContact: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org CC: mike@w3.org, public-webapps@w3.org some, but not all of the rule formulations in XHR are based on an undocumented 'switch' convention, that, without further explanation, allows ambiguous interpretation: for example, in 4.7.7 appears the following: ↪ Once the whole response entity body has been received ↪ If there is no response entity body and the state is LOADING ↪ If there is no response entity body and the synchronous flag is set Switch to the DONE state. if I rephrase this as: ↪ If A ↪ If B ↪ If C Then X then which of the following is meant by the above convention? #1 If A && B && C then X then break from switch #2 If A && B && C then X then fall through to next rule #3 If A || B || C then X then break from switch #4 If A || B || C then X then fall through to next rule any of these are possible interpretations given the lack of an explanation of this convention [i note that this convention also appears in HTML5 drafts and is also not documented there either] -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 11 March 2012 05:18:29 UTC