Closed
Bug 389626
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
Rename XMLHttpRequest.sendAsBinary to XMLHttpRequest.mozSendAsBinary
Categories
(Core :: XML, defect)
Core
XML
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WONTFIX
People
(Reporter: takenspc, Assigned: takenspc)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
2.76 KB,
patch
|
sicking
:
review-
sicking
:
superreview-
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
We should rename |XMLHttpRequest.sendAsBinary()| to |XMLHttpRequest.mozSendAsBinary()| because it's not a part of the XMLHttpReqeust specification.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-XMLHttpRequest-20070618/
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: superreview?(jonas)
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: review?(jonas)
Comment on attachment 273906 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch
Prefixing functions with 'moz' is something we've never done. I'd rather that this was raised with the work group and tried to standardize instead. This is something that would be great to get help with.
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: superreview?(jonas)
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: superreview-
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: review?(jonas)
Attachment #273906 -
Flags: review-
Comment 2•17 years ago
|
||
Please rename it. That at least makes it more clear to developers that this is a Mozilla-only extension. The proposal for XHR2 is .send(in ByteArray data) btw.
Updated•17 years ago
|
Flags: blocking1.9?
I still contend that this is something that no vendor has ever done. The suggested name isn't going to collide with this one, but depends on ES4 features. If other browsers want to support this functionality, but does not yet have an ES4 implementation, they'll likely want to add a function like ours. If we prefix it with 'moz' no other vendor will want to choose the same name and so it'll just make it harder for web authors.
So I'm still going to argue that this is not something we want to do.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Flags: blocking1.9? → blocking1.9-
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•