Web IDL Garden Hose (was: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination)
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
> 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...
More information about the es-discuss