Any discussion of "compact" subset for mobile devices?

ToolmakerSteve98 toolmakersteve98 at
Fri Mar 21 01:31:38 PDT 2008

"Brendan Eich" wrote:
> That's not the web, sorry. JavaScript is and will remain a web source
> language for the foreseeable future. The Ecma TG1 (now TC39) group
> charged with maintaining and improving its standard ...

Just consider me to be one more voice concerned that if technically 
misjudge, would cause a delay in the "improved" standard catching on. That 
would be a damn shame. Or worse IMHO, it does catch on, but increases the 
number of websites that aren't practical to browse from mobile devices.

> not going to throw it out and require a CLR-like VM and standardized 
> interchange
> bytecode.

Quite true. Let me describe this a different way. Maximal compatibility 
between different platforms. If there is a subset of ES4 that is 
demonstrably more compatible with certain Microsoft technologies, I would 
recommend to anyone who cares that they restrict themselves to that subset. 
I would also recommend to toolmakers such as Adobe that they give their 
customers an option to invoke that restriction. If this subset turns out to 
be powerful enough, and advantageous enough, there would then be a solid 
argument to use it. As long as it validates as ES4, it would not be 
non-standard. And if it turns out to have strong enough practical benefits 
(including "politically" practical), there may be a strong de facto argument 
for widespread adoption. At that point (if such a point is reached), I would 
argue that anyone who wants to target low-end clients should so restrict 
themselves in what they put on their servers.

The burden of proof is on my end. Just giving you a heads up that I have 
some concerns, though those are only a gut check at this time, and plan to 
make some concrete demonstrations regarding those sometime before ES4 goes 


More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list