Module naming and declarations
rossberg at google.com
Mon Apr 29 06:43:51 PDT 2013
On 26 April 2013 01:20, David Herman <dherman at mozilla.com> wrote:
> But let's keep the question of having lexical *private* modules separate from this thread, which is about Andreas's suggestion to have lexical modules be the central way to define *public* modules.
No, that's not what I suggested -- but I fully admit that my actual
suggestion (and motivation) may have been overly obfuscated by my
longish post. :)
I do think lexical names are essential to provide internal naming,
which is vital. Thus having lexical modules was the first half of my
suggestion. "Public" modules however are externally visible, so are
naturally named by external names. The second half of my suggestion
was that we should use proper URIs for that. The "third half" was
about properly separating these concerns.
See also my latest reply to Sam for some more details.
>> Also, in a two-level system of external and lexical names, could one
>> not model the coordination level by a registry/configuration module?
> No, it would be too hard to get this expressive enough to satisfy the web platform's polyfilling needs.
I'm not sure I get that, what has coordination to do with polyfilling?
More information about the es-discuss