- From: Alec Flett <alecflett@chromium.org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 11:37:36 -0700
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2012 18:38:36 UTC
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote: > On 10/9/12 1:52 PM, Joshua Bell wrote: > >> The IDB spec does not have [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] specified on >> openCursor()'s arguments (or anywhere else), so I believe Chrome's >> behavior here is correct. >> > > It looks correct as the spec is currently written. > > It's not clear to me why the spec is written the way it is. It could just > as easily define that if the "any" value is undefined, it's ignored. Or it > could use [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing], indeed. I have to say, as a developer it can be really frustrating to write abstractions on top of APIs that behave this way, when you want to say something like: var direction; var range; if (condition1) direction = 'prev'; else if (condition2) direction = 'prevuniq'; if (condition3) { range = range1; else if (condition4) range = range2; return source.openCursor(range, direction); Alec
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2012 18:38:36 UTC