It seems to me that for both the HeaderMap constructor and any object-literal processing, the best solution for now is to just do things in prose...
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anne van Kesteren Sent: Wednesday, June 4, 2014 00:50 To: Domenic Denicola Cc: public-script-coord; Joshua Bell; Jungkee Song; Yehuda Katz; Alex Russell; Jonas Sicking; Jake Archibald; Tobie Langel; WebApps WG Subject: Re: Fetch API On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote: > - HeaderMap should have a constructor that takes an iterable of [key, value] > pairs, in the same way Map does. Yeah, waiting for IDL hooks that would work here ;-) > - I like HeaderMap a lot, but for construction purposes, I wonder if a > shorthand for the usual case could be provided. E.g. it would be nice > to be able to do > > fetch("http://example.com";, { > headers: { > "X-Foo": "Bar" > } > }); > > instead of, assuming a constructor is added, > > fetch("http://example.com";, { > headers: new HeaderMap([ > ["X-Foo", "Bar"] > ]) > }); Yeah, it's not clear to me what is best here. An object whose keys are ByteString and values are either ByteString or a sequence of ByteString? I agree that we want this. Part of the problem here is how to best represent HTTP headers. See https://github.com/slightlyoff/ServiceWorker/issues/300 for more details. -- http://annevankesteren.nl/
