W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: [IndexedDB] IDBKeyRange should have static functions

From: Joshua Bell <jsbell@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:14:49 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD649j7-p91c+BNx8DctKH-d5t5M0an-1ctoLMAHn9Cmnwf0wQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Very much appreciated. I've added this and the other 4 items from Ms2ger to
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17649 for tracking purposes,
since there was some overlap with items in there already.

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Ms2ger <ms2ger@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> From the examples in the IDB specification (in [1], for example) and from
> existing implementations, it appears that the functions on the IDBKeyRange
> interface (only, lowerBound, upperBound and bound) should be static.
> However, there is no actual normative requirement to that effect; instead,
> the IDL snippet requires those functions to only be callable on IDBKeyRange
> instances. [2]
> If this is caused by a bug in ReSpec, I suggest that either ReSpec is
> fixed or the spec moves away from ReSpec to a tool that doesn't limit what
> can be specified. In any case, an insufficient tool can not be used as an
> excuse for an incorrect specification, and I doubt we could publish a Rec
> without this shortcoming being addressed.
> Ms2ger
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/**IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/**
> Overview.html#key-generator-**concept<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#key-generator-concept>
> [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/**IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/**
> Overview.html#idl-def-**IDBKeyRange<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/IndexedDB/raw-file/tip/Overview.html#idl-def-IDBKeyRange>
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2013 17:15:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:13:58 UTC