Thanks for flipping the bits, Ayu. Domenic: it seems like this is part of a longer-running set of changes we've had going in DOM-land regarding moving away from subclasses of Error types, and IIRC this is a motivating factor in the TAG's Design Principles guidance on error types <https://www.w3.org/TR/design-principles/#error-types>. Should we cite to that? And should the principles be updated to discuss not using subclasses with this sort of specific example?
Best, Alex On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 5:28:48 PM UTC-7 dan...@microsoft.com wrote: > Can you please request the other review bits in ChromeStatus (privacy, > security, etc)? > > -- Dan > > On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 3:42:02 PM UTC-7 ay...@chromium.org wrote: > >> Contact emails >> >> ay...@chromium.org, dom...@chromium.org >> > >> Explainer >> >> https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/pull/1465 >> >> Specification >> >> https://github.com/whatwg/webidl/pull/1465 >> >> Summary >> >> Currently, when the web platform wants to tell you when you've exceeded >> quota, it will use `DOMException` with the specific `name` property set to >> `QuotaExceededError`. However this does not allow carrying additional >> information. >> >> This proposes removing "QuotaExceededError" from the list of built-in >> `DOMException` names, and instead creates a class name `QuotaExceededError` >> from the list of built-in `DOMException` and has the additional optional >> properties `quota` and `requested`. We propose all instances of specs that >> throw "QuotaExceededError" `DOMException`s get upgraded to instead throw >> `QuotaExceededError`s. For now, such specs would leave the `quota` and >> `requested` properties at their default value of `null`, but they could >> eventually upgrade to include that data, if it's useful for their use case >> (and isn't, e.g., a privacy leak). >> >> >> Blink component >> >> Blink >> <https://issues.chromium.org/issues?q=customfield1222907:%22Blink%22> >> >> TAG review >> >> Review request filed & closed >> <https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/1065> >> >> TAG review status >> >> N/A >> >> Risks >> >> Interoperability and Compatibility >> >> This is technically backward-incompatible with some rare coding patterns. >> The spec PR outlines those, and compares them with the more common coding >> patterns which work the same even after this change. Given that quota >> exceeded exceptions only occur in rare cases anyway, and the most popular >> patterns will continue working with no problem, we think the compat risk >> here is small. Nevertheless, we'll carefully monitor for breakage, and use >> Finch to revert if any serious problems are found. >> >> We anticipate low interoperability risk, as we suspect that if Chromium >> proves that this is web-compatible, other browsers will quickly follow. And >> even during the transition period, the most common coding patterns will >> work in all browsers. >> >> >> >> Gecko: Under consideration ( >> https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/1223) >> >> WebKit: Pending (https://github.com/WebKit/standards-positions/issues/468 >> ) >> >> Web developers: No signals >> >> Other signals: >> >> Ergonomics >> >> None >> >> >> Activation >> >> N/A >> >> >> Security >> >> None >> >> >> WebView application risks >> >> Does this intent deprecate or change behavior of existing APIs, such that >> it has potentially high risk for Android WebView-based applications? >> >> None >> >> >> Debuggability >> >> None >> >> >> Will this feature be supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, >> Linux, ChromeOS, Android, and Android WebView)? >> >> Yes >> >> Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests >> <https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/main/docs/testing/web_platform_tests.md> >> ? >> >> To be added here >> <https://crsrc.org/c/third_party/blink/web_tests/external/wpt/webidl/ecmascript-binding/es-exceptions/DOMException-constructor-behavior.any.js> >> >> Flag name on about://flags >> >> None >> >> Finch feature name >> >> QuotaExceededError >> >> Requires code in //chrome? >> >> False >> >> Measurement >> >> N/A >> >> Estimated milestones >> >> M138 >> >> >> Anticipated spec changes >> >> Open questions about a feature may be a source of future web compat or >> interop issues. Please list open issues (e.g. links to known github issues >> in the project for the feature specification) whose resolution may >> introduce web compat/interop risk (e.g., changing to naming or structure of >> the API in a non-backward-compatible way). >> >> We haven't yet sent spec PRs to update all specifications to use this new >> error type, but that process is pretty mechanical, and we will do so once >> we're sure this sticks. We want to avoid badgering 9 separate spec editors >> into merging our update PRs, if there's a possibility we'd then have to >> badger them to accept 9 separate revert PRs a couple months later. >> >> >> Link to entry on the Chrome Platform Status >> >> https://chromestatus.com/feature/6194847180128256?gate=5011647107956736 >> >> This intent message was generated by Chrome Platform Status >> <https://chromestatus.com/>. >> >> -- 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 visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/9b7ee59b-7346-4870-ab8f-8b549e183868n%40chromium.org.
