- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 17:35:46 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- cc: "www-dom@w3.org" <www-dom@w3.org>
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:07:58 +0200, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Jun 2011, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > > How would you define > > > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/progress/#interface-progressevent in a > > > more simple manner? Defining the mapping for the dictionary is rather > > > trivial, but I agree that if we can make it more trivial or unnecessary > > > even, that would be nice. > > > > "The lengthComputable attribute must return the value it was > > initialised to. Its default value is false." > > > > Then in the definition of the constructor: "Initialise all attributes > > to their default values. For each attribute with name /foo/ in the > > dictionary, initialise the attribute on the event with the same name > > /foo/ to the value of the attribute on the dictionary." > > > > With a bit more massaging to use the right terms and so on, but that's > > the basic idea. > > I guess this could work, but it seems kind of weird that readonly > attributes are set this way. That is the reason I instead had them > return internal concepts. Essentially, what I described can be viewed as an "internal concept": it defines the attributes as each having an "initialised" value. They're just not explicitly named. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 26 June 2011 17:36:09 UTC