W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2014

RE: Push API - use parameterized Promise types

From: Luke Hoban <lukeh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 17:13:34 +0000
To: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>
CC: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <d9396f1d04e14aa58feaa8f763bb8065@BN1PR03MB037.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
I agree that there is significant readability value to the consumer of a WebIDL-based API spec if the return types of Promise-returning APIs are captured in the IDL.  For the same reason that documenting return types is valuable to readability even though not enforced in the JavaScript projection of WebIDL.  The IDL serves a useful documentation purpose even beyond the explicit semantics it conveys.

Luke

From: Michael van Ouwerkerk
Sent: 3/20/2014 11:46
To: Domenic Denicola
Cc: public-webapps
Subject: Re: Push API - use parameterized Promise types
So it is not normative? It seems it would be very informative though, so still worth adding to the spec. But it seems it would be even better if it was changed to be normative. 

Thanks,

Michael




On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com> wrote:
From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>
> Ah I didn't know it has no effect on return values. Why not?
Well, I believe it's the same with all WebIDL method return values. If you return something that doesn't match the declared return value, that's a spec bug, but it has no impact on anything. (This is unlike argument values, where if the user passes in something that doesn't match the declared parameter type then conversion is performed.)
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2014 17:14:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:22 UTC