May 24-26 rough meeting notes

Brendan Eich brendan at mozilla.com
Sat May 28 12:57:04 PDT 2011


On May 28, 2011, at 11:32 AM, Peter Michaux wrote:

> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Waldemar <waldemar at google.com> wrote:
> 
>> Versioning:
>> <script type="application/ecmascript;version=6">  (RFC 4329)
>> use version 6;
>> module LOL {
>>  ...
>> }
>> </script>
>> There are good reasons to have the metadata both externally (in the script
>> tag) and internally (in the script).  External versioning allows
>> implementations to avoid fetching a script at all if they won't understand
>> it.  Internal versioning helps in the case where the external version is
>> detached.
>> 
>> Brendan's idea:
>> <script-if type=...>
>>  ...
>> <script-elif type=...>
>>  ...
>> <script-else>
>>  ...
>> </script>

http://www.mail-archive.com/es-discuss@mozilla.org/msg05005.html had the example I was trying to reconstruct from memory at last week's meeting:

<script-if type="application/ecmascript;version=6">
  // new.js inline-exanded here
</script-if else>
 <script ...>
 </script>
</script-if end>

>> Consensus on moving some form of versioning into Harmony.  The strawman is a
>> bit light at this time, so no specifics yet.
> 
> A lot of the above looks like HTML. Isn't versioning that depends on
> HTML out of scope for the ECMAScript standard?

Yes, so? Call the jusdiction police :-P. We were talking about a "systems" problem, which requires looking across layers and considering the big picture.

At the meeting, Mark Miller suggested we take the idea of <script-if> to the public-script-coord mailing list. I'll do that next week.

/be



More information about the es-discuss mailing list