- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
- Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:00:14 +0200
- To: Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Jussi Kalliokoski <jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com> wrote: > Another bad example of using strings for these kind of things, from much > closer, is XHR's responseType where it's excruciatingly painful to try to > detect for example whether responseType "json" (it may throw when you set > it, it may result in the `error` event or it may silently fail and set the > JSON as string to response) is supported, let alone "arraybuffer". Those sound like bugs in the implementation. If a given value is not supported, setting should not happen. (And in the case of to(), it'll reject.) > Feature detection is not the only concern though, another one is that it > encourages putting a lot of complexity behind one flag (just like > responseType) which is likely to lead to interoperability issues. It's not that much complexity really. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Monday, 16 June 2014 12:00:40 UTC