This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
WebIDL redefined what happens when "undefined" is passed to an "optional boolean whatever = true" argument, but for open() I believe we want to keep the old behavior of treating undefined as false. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2013OctDec/0041.html for details, including the IDL Gecko is using for open() now.
So in particular, omitted would be true and undefined would be false. It seems odd to define that via an overload. I guess TreatUndefinedAs might be going away given that we do not need it elsewhere so maybe an overload is the way to go, but then we do not want to spread overload usage either...
> So in particular, omitted would be true and undefined would be false. Yes. > It seems odd to define that via an overload. I guess TreatUndefinedAs might be > going away given that we do not need it elsewhere so maybe an overload is the > way to go, but then we do not want to spread overload usage either... Sure, but I think it's safe to say that the set of cases that want to treat omitted as true and undefined as false is small and nonincreasing...
I filed bug 23701 on IDL to remove TreatAsUndefined entirely. I fixed this bug via overloading as suggested: https://github.com/whatwg/xhr/commit/76a4c653ffd0a65e04a52fe2daa9729dbcf64410