Web IDL Garden Hose (was: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination)

Maciej Stachowiak mjs at apple.com
Sat Sep 26 13:08:31 PDT 2009

On Sep 26, 2009, at 8:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:

> No we are not.  This is exactly the heart of our concern. The WebIDL
> ECMAScript binding is not simply a mapping of IDL interface onto
> standard language features (such as is done for the Java binding).
> While it has some of that it also defines an extended ECMAScrpt  
> language
> with new semantics. (and I understand this is mostly a reflection
> of past (present?) practice of browser implementers).  Essentially,
> the semantics of "browser ECMAScript" has been arbitrarily split into
> two independently maintained standards.

Is there any concrete concern on this front other than property access  


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20090926/1f448497/attachment.html>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list