Well, I interpreted your comment that way ("it has no impact on anything").
Maybe normative vs informative is not what you meant though?/m On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Domenic Denicola < dome...@domenicdenicola.com> wrote: > I am not sure what you mean in this context by normative vs. > informative. How would implementations differ if it were normative vs. if > it were informative? > ------------------------------ > From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerk...@google.com> > Sent: 3/20/2014 11:46 > To: Domenic Denicola <dome...@domenicdenicola.com> > Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Push API - use parameterized Promise types > > So it is not normative? It seems it would be very informative though, so > still worth adding to the spec. But it seems it would be even better if it > was changed to be normative. > > Thanks, > > Michael > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Domenic Denicola < > dome...@domenicdenicola.com> wrote: > >> From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerk...@google.com> >> >> > Ah I didn't know it has no effect on return values. Why not? >> >> Well, I believe it's the same with all WebIDL method return values. If >> you return something that doesn't match the declared return value, that's a >> spec bug, but it has no impact on anything. (This is unlike argument >> values, where if the user passes in something that doesn't match the >> declared parameter type then conversion is performed.) > > >
