has the syntax for proxies been finalized ?
waldron.rick at gmail.com
Fri Oct 18 08:13:58 PDT 2013
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Domenic Denicola <
domenic at domenicdenicola.com> wrote:
> From: es-discuss [es-discuss-bounces at mozilla.org] on behalf of Angus
> Croll [anguscroll at gmail.com
> > Also (to all) deleting or marking as obsolete all wiki-harmony docs that
> no longer meet the standard would save a lot of wasted hours
@Angus, I'm sorry this happened, I try to keep up with marking wiki docs'
status as best as I can.
> I know Rick has already made strides in that direction via warnings like
> > "This API is superseded by the newer direct proxies API."
> > This proposal has progressed to the Draft ECMAScript 6 Specification
> (Sept. 2013 draft Sections 9.3 and 26.2), which is available for review
> here: specification_drafts. Any new issues relating to them should be filed
> as bugs at http://bugs.ecmascript.org. The content on this page is for
> historic record only and may no longer reflect the current state of the
> feature described within.
> But I somewhat agree that the warnings are not scary enough. Something
> drastic like moving the entire page to "obsolete:proxies" would be nice.
> But, eh, broken links :-/.
I'm all for suggestions to make it _even_ _more_ _clear_, as long as those
suggestions don't break links (as Domenic has mentioned here). Currently,
the "old" proxy proposals are stricken on the harmony:proposals page and
the direct proxies proposal includes the "progressed to draft" text.
FWIW, I've added "The content on this page is OBSOLETE" to the three oldest
@Tom - since you know the status of the more recent Proxy wiki pages better
than I do, would you mind adding the same h1 text to those that fit the
description of "obsolete"? Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss