[whatwg] SQL API and changeVersion() with no callbacks

On Oct 26, 2007, at 3:23 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Brady Eidson wrote:
>> For the sake of simplicity in the API, I see no reason why there
>> couldn't be a single version of changeVersion() with the 2 strings  
>> and 2
>> callbacks.  Then if a user truly wanted to call changeVersion() but
>> wasn't interested in the results, they could just pass null for  
>> both of
>> the callbacks.
> Very good point. I have removed the overloads here. This is not  
> going to
> be frequently called, so why not require the callbacks.
>> I suppose the same could be said about executeSql().
> Well... I can certainly see people queuing up a bunch of requests and
> dealing with the errors at the end in the transaction error handler.  
> I am
> open to requiring that that have an explicit "null" though. Who do  
> other
> people think?

I'm glad there's agreement on changeVersion() and that it has been  

I wanted to raise the executeSql() point for discussion, not because I  
feel strongly about it.  I agree that queueing up a bunch of queries  
then dealing with the error at the end is a realistic use case.


Received on Friday, 26 October 2007 15:32:40 UTC