- From: Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:42:07 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: Marcin Hanclik <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>, public-geolocation <public-geolocation@w3.org>
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Anne van Kesteren<annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:27:58 +0200, Andrei Popescu <andreip@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Marcin
>> Hanclik<Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com> wrote:
>>> b) interface Coordinates uses type "double".
>>> WebIDL does not know this type. Could we use "float"?
>>> Or if we need more precision maybe {long, long} (a new interface)
>>> should be used?
>>
>> I don't think this is a problem: I haven't seen any implementers
>> complaining about this. 'double' is pretty clear and maps well to JS's
>> Number type.
>
> It is still an issue though. Web IDL does not define how double maps to ECMAScript. In fact, your IDL fragment would not parse. So either you request on public-webapps@w3.org that Web IDL is changed to allow for double or you switch to using float.
>
I guess using a float is also fine since WebIDL says it maps to Number
in ECMAScript. But why doesn't WebIDL allow double? Numbers in
ECMASctipt are doubles...Anyway, I imagine this was already discussed
by the group defining WebIDL, do you have any pointer to the
discussion? Out of curiosity, I'd like to read it.
Thanks,
Andrei
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2009 11:42:43 UTC