Yep. Reasonable people can disagree on the tradeoffs here. The question is whether this is something we want to deadlock over with other implementers.
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 12:28 PM Mike Taylor <miketa...@chromium.org> wrote: > On 10/29/21 1:23 AM, Yoav Weiss wrote: > > Hey Domenic! :) > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 11:00 PM Domenic Denicola <dome...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> >> FWIW the two HTML editors on the thread (myself and Anne, with our HTML >> editor hats on), as well as Mozilla (via Anne with his Mozilla hat on), >> prefer the throwing behavior. I think in most cases to overcome that >> position we would need some really strong reasons why the Chromium project >> believes the non-throwing behavior is better. It's not clear to me how >> strong Chromium's position is on this issue, and whether it's worth >> delaying the feature over. (Or indeed, delaying all the features, since the >> plan seems to be to bundle them together?) >> > > My concerns with the throwing behavior are similar to the ones we have > discussed > <https://github.com/w3c/mediasession/issues/228#issuecomment-886455386> > in the context of MediaSession actions. > If we go with the throwing behavior, every future addition of filters > would have a significant interop risk, in case adopting developers won't > use try/catch properly. If they do that and they are not testing in > not-yet-supporting browsers, their apps are likely to break entirely in > those browsers. > If we go with a silent failure + feature detection approach, developers > using the feature without properly detecting it may not have the desired > visual effects they are going for, but won't have unrelated parts of their > app break. > > From my perspective (with my API owner hat on), less risk is better, and > the second approach seems less risky to me. > > I agree with Yoav here (sorry, I don't own any hats). Not throwing will > likely result in fewer broken pages in less-well-tested browsers that > haven't implemented the APIs yet. And +1 for devtools warnings to help > developers figure out "silent" failures. > > (I also wonder if requiring try/catch won't trip up new developers trying > to use it inside Promises, who don't yet know about `then()/catch()` > patterns). > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+unsubscr...@chromium.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAM0wra_XxwrFzQ2Dzn78ErXCBXXUVMRWcgvWhkGv%3DOLWEwObTw%40mail.gmail.com.
