kdex at kdex.de
Fri Aug 10 17:27:23 UTC 2018
I'd be interested to learn why it was decided to redact a possible new name
for `global` in the latest meeting notes.
Although I do understand that redacting the name minimizes its chance to gain
more usage, I doubt that the impact would be significant; if anything, I think
people would have trouble to think of this form of standardization as "open".
By the same argument, we could in principle redact any new prototype/global
property, couldn't we? Is the intent not to cause a second "smooshgate"?
What's the point?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the es-discuss