Re: [WebIDL] NoInterfaceObject and access to constants

2010-06-15 Thread Simon Pieters 
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:56:31 +0200, Nikunj Mehta   
wrote:



Hi all,

I am trying to provide access to constants defined in IndexedDB  
interfaces. For example:

interface IDBRequest : EventTarget {
void abort ();
const unsigned short INITIAL = 0;
const unsigned short LOADING = 1;
const unsigned short DONE = 2;
readonly attribute unsigned short readyState;
 attribute Function   onsuccess;
 attribute Function   onerror;
};
Given that this interface doesn't contain the modifier  
[NoInterfaceObject], shouldn't it be possible to access the global  
object, e.g., window and from that the interface and from that the  
constant? As an example:


window.IDBRequest.INITIAL or IDBRequest.INITIAL


Yes.

http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-interfaces
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#es-constants


For interfaces that should not be available as a property on the global  
object, I need to apply the [NoInterfaceObject] modifier, but that  
doesn't apply here.


Can anyone confirm or refute this so that an open issue on the IndexedDB  
spec can be closed without action?


--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

[WebIDL] NoInterfaceObject and access to constants

2010-06-15 Thread Nikunj Mehta 
Hi all,

I am trying to provide access to constants defined in IndexedDB interfaces. For 
example:
interface IDBRequest : EventTarget {
void abort ();
const unsigned short INITIAL = 0;
const unsigned short LOADING = 1;
const unsigned short DONE = 2;
readonly attribute unsigned short readyState;
 attribute Function   onsuccess;
 attribute Function   onerror;
};
Given that this interface doesn't contain the modifier [NoInterfaceObject], 
shouldn't it be possible to access the global object, e.g., window and from 
that the interface and from that the constant? As an example:

window.IDBRequest.INITIAL or IDBRequest.INITIAL

For interfaces that should not be available as a property on the global object, 
I need to apply the [NoInterfaceObject] modifier, but that doesn't apply here.

Can anyone confirm or refute this so that an open issue on the IndexedDB spec 
can be closed without action?

Thanks,
Nikunj