This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 29168 - Does it make sense to require the use of "unknown error"?
Summary: Does it make sense to require the use of "unknown error"?
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Browser Test/Tools WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: WebDriver (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Linux
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Browser Testing and Tools WG
QA Contact: Browser Testing and Tools WG
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 20860
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2015-10-02 06:46 UTC by juangj
Modified: 2015-10-26 06:21 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description juangj 2015-10-02 06:46:21 UTC
From 8. Invalid SSL Certificates:

"In this case, implementations may choose to make accessing a site with bad HTTPS configurations cause a WebDriverException to be thrown. Remote end implementations must return an unknown error error code in this case."

It seems odd to say that the remote end MUST return an "unknown error" in a case where we know exactly what the error is. There doesn't seem to be any other fitting error code, though.

Is "unknown error" intended to just be the catch-all for errors that don't fit any of the other error codes?
Comment 1 James Graham 2015-10-26 06:21:28 UTC
For the SSL case we'll implement a new error.