- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 15:24:28 -0700
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote: > I didn't really get around to working on URLs this week like I > planned, but I managed to draft the query API that was discussed in > the last thread: > > http://url.spec.whatwg.org/#urlutils > > get() returns the first value. getAll() returns all values. set() > either sets a single or multiple values. delete() well, deletes. > > Based on discussion in #whatwg > http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20121012#l-981 I did not go > with a design that would require proxies when implemented in > JavaScript. > > Having said that, nothing is set in stone, bikeshed away! ;-) I definitely prefer the "design that would require proxies" - it feels more natural to me. Glenn outlined a reasonable way to still mix in the "getAll()" idiom. If we do stick with the method-based map, I strongly feel we should match the JS Map API, and have a has() method as well. *Ideally*, this would be a subclass of Map. ~TJ
Received on Friday, 12 October 2012 22:25:16 UTC