kdex 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[1].

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?

[1] https://github.com/rwaldron/tc39-notes/blob/master/es9/2018-07/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20180810/2061773c/attachment.sig>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list