Web IDL Garden Hose (was: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination)
brendan at mozilla.com
Fri Sep 25 23:28:32 PDT 2009
On Sep 25, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com>
>> On Sep 25, 2009, at 9:38 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>> Another way to put my earlier concern
>> Sorry, what earlier concern? You are replying to my reply to Doug
>> on a sub-thread where I didn't see a message from you.
> So confusing! So many messages!
No, you just replied off-topic and rehashed an issue that we all agree
needs fixing, seemingly as if I had implied that it wasn't an issue.
Although the generous citations of my reply to Doug Schepers that you
included of course implied nothing of the kind.
Why did you do that?
> My point is that understanding the semantics of the language as
> implemented by browser vendors is not possible by reading the language
> spec. These is not some hypothetical extension, but a mandatory way
> that ECMAScript implemented for the web must behave.
We seem to agree, perhaps vehemently :-/.
One last time, for the record: it is a bug in ES specs that you can't
The whole point of bothering the HTML WG, public-webapps, and es-
discuss about collaboration between Ecma and W3C folks has been to
fill gaps between specs and reality. We had some false starts in my
view (like trying to move ES WebIDL bindings to Ecma up front, or
ever). But the issues laid out in Sam's original cross-post were
exactly the "gaps" between ES specs, HTML5 ones, and browser
implementations. At last some of the gaps are filled in HTML5 but not
in ways that can be injected directly into ES specs.
We should fix the ES specs, and make whatever changes follow to the
HTML5 specs. And maybe use WebIDL to constrain "host objects". All
this has been said on the thread already. Were you not reading the
messages I was?
More information about the es-discuss