<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes" ?>
<!DOCTYPE bugzilla SYSTEM "https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/page.cgi?id=bugzilla.dtd">

<bugzilla version="5.0.4"
          urlbase="https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/"
          
          maintainer="sysbot+bugzilla@w3.org"
>

    <bug>
          <bug_id>16707</bug_id>
          
          <creation_ts>2012-04-12 07:07:46 +0000</creation_ts>
          <short_desc>user/password set to undefined means missing</short_desc>
          <delta_ts>2012-10-11 10:08:14 +0000</delta_ts>
          <reporter_accessible>1</reporter_accessible>
          <cclist_accessible>1</cclist_accessible>
          <classification_id>1</classification_id>
          <classification>Unclassified</classification>
          <product>WebAppsWG</product>
          <component>XHR</component>
          <version>unspecified</version>
          <rep_platform>PC</rep_platform>
          <op_sys>All</op_sys>
          <bug_status>RESOLVED</bug_status>
          <resolution>FIXED</resolution>
          
          
          <bug_file_loc></bug_file_loc>
          <status_whiteboard></status_whiteboard>
          <keywords></keywords>
          <priority>P2</priority>
          <bug_severity>normal</bug_severity>
          <target_milestone>---</target_milestone>
          
          
          <everconfirmed>1</everconfirmed>
          <reporter name="Anne">annevk</reporter>
          <assigned_to name="Anne">annevk</assigned_to>
          <cc>bzbarsky</cc>
    
    <cc>cam</cc>
    
    <cc>jonas</cc>
    
    <cc>julian.reschke</cc>
    
    <cc>mike</cc>
    
    <cc>public-webapps</cc>
          
          <qa_contact>public-webapps-bugzilla</qa_contact>

      

      

      

          <comment_sort_order>oldest_to_newest</comment_sort_order>  
          <long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>66630</commentid>
    <comment_count>0</comment_count>
    <who name="Anne">annevk</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-12 07:07:46 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>When the user/password arguments are set to undefined they should be treated as missing arguments. Either via an IDL option or because that is what undefined means per ES/IDL.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>66641</commentid>
    <comment_count>1</comment_count>
    <who name="Cameron McCormack">cam</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-12 07:42:40 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>If we don&apos;t change Web IDL due to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2012AprJun/0105.html then bang a [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] on those two arguments.  If we do change Web IDL, then [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing] will disappear and it&apos;ll just be the default behaviour.

I wonder what the behaviour should be if undefined is specified for username but not for password.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>66643</commentid>
    <comment_count>2</comment_count>
    <who name="Anne">annevk</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-12 07:50:28 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>The other alternative here is that since undefined becomes null per IDL we could maybe make null mean missing in prose.

Currently user/password are a bit of a mess because of bug 10326 and to a lesser extent bug 15418. If someone could explain what we should do for them that would be nice.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>66668</commentid>
    <comment_count>3</comment_count>
    <who name="Boris Zbarsky">bzbarsky</who>
    <bug_when>2012-04-12 17:05:36 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>Right.  The big question is whether explicit null passed should mean &quot;missing&quot;.  If it should, then we should have a nullable string here with null as default value and just have the prose talk about null.  If it should not, then we should use [TreatUndefinedAs=Missing], probably have this be a non-nullable string, and the prose should talk about missing arguments.</thetext>
  </long_desc><long_desc isprivate="0" >
    <commentid>75958</commentid>
    <comment_count>4</comment_count>
    <who name="Anne">annevk</who>
    <bug_when>2012-10-11 10:08:14 +0000</bug_when>
    <thetext>This is fixed as suggested in comment 3 by bug 17242 comment 16.</thetext>
  </long_desc>
      
      

    </bug>

</bugzilla>