- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 21:35:15 -0400
- To: Ryan Sleevi <sleevi@google.com>
- CC: "public-webcrypto@w3.org" <public-webcrypto@w3.org>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
On 7/9/14, 4:16 PM, Ryan Sleevi wrote: > I think we're saying the same thing, just differently, in that algorithm > normalization allows an ES NULL value to be propagated through, right? null value. Yes, for nullable members. > I didn't think default values were legal for union types > (CryptoOperationData). They are legal as long as it's a valid default value for a type in the union. > I also didn't think it was legal for ArrayBuffer/ArrayBufferView, since > Web IDL currently (AIUI) treats them as object types, and there's no way > to represent constant object types (which would be needed for default > value, AIUI) Yes, I'm saying we should fix this in Web IDL as needed . More importantly, I'm saying that we should not allow Web IDL to constrain our API design in cases when it's obviously leading to a worse API. If that happens, that's a problem with Web IDL. Most simply, we could add some syntax in Web IDL to require a dictionary value to be present in a dictionary. This has come up a few times now. > Just to make sure linguistically we're on the same page. You're > proposing I refer to the value of %ArrayBufferPrototype%.slice, right? > Using the aforementioned table as the definition for %ArrayBufferPrototype% I think you want "the initial value of %ArrayBufferPrototype%.slice" here. -Boris
Received on Thursday, 10 July 2014 01:35:47 UTC