On Feb 25, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Jian Li wrote:
> I like option 3 since it seems to be the one to involve far less changes.
> However, people who read the code really need to get a good understanding of
> differences between FormData and DOMFormData.
Lets start with this, and later if we think of s
I like option 3 since it seems to be the one to involve far less changes.
However, people who read the code really need to get a good understanding of
differences between FormData and DOMFormData.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Michael Nordman wrote:
> option 3: We could name any new classes b
option 3: We could name any new classes backing the new scriptable object as
DOMFormData (similar in sprirt to DOMWindow), and leave the existing
FormData classes as they are.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Jian Li wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking into the work to support FormData interface as de
Hi,
I am looking into the work to support FormData interface as defined in
XMLHttpRequest Level 2 (
http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/XMLHttpRequest-2/#formdata). To support the
new FormData interface, we need to add the FormData object that collides
with the name that has already existed. Currently w
4 matches
Mail list logo
