Re: [css-houdini-drafts] Should we be using DOMString, USVString, or CSSOMString?

The Working Group just discussed `Which string type? - DOMString, USVString, or CSSOMString?`, and agreed to the following resolutions:

* `RESOLVED: spec goes with CSSOM String with an issue saying this is discussed by TAG and should resolve in the future`

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Which string type? - DOMString, USVString, or CSSOMString?<br>
&lt;TabAtkins> Github: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/687<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Intro: I need to know what type of string to use. Everyone familiar with these three?<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: DOM is just JS strings. USV string is that but you can't write unpaired surrigates. Only actual scalar values. CSSOM string is one or the other and the UA has to choose.<br>
&lt;dael> gsnedders: And it has to be consistant.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: The arguments. USV string, it's an actual string and DOM allows nonsense. But DOM is exactly what JS uses. Some browsers can naively handle a scalar value faster and cheaper under the hood. Servo does that.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Earlier we as do USV and for browsers not doing that have a long. Dominic came in and said don't do that, we use DOM for everything except those that require scalar values.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: There was an argument on this on github between Dominic and plinss. [scrolls through github]<br>
&lt;dbaron> https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/84 is an open issue about whether the WebIDL spec is providing the right advice there<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: So, do we wait for TAG?<br>
&lt;dael> plinss: We discussed in Tokyo. We dont have solid advice yet. Ther'es a plan to get JS people and webIDL people together, but no answer yet.<br>
&lt;dbaron> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/93 is the TAG issue on this<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: For the spec, I can put an inline in the spec saying it's under contention.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: You're saying it's one or the other.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Right now it's CSS string and if the tag narrows down we'll align.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: I can go with that. Change everything to cssom string.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Yeah, it's pretty much what we do.<br>
&lt;dael> astearns: But with the inline note saying we're hoping less vague.<br>
&lt;dael> TabAtkins: Prop: spec goes with CSSOM String with an issue saying this is discussed by TAG and should resolve in the future<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen_: Obj or opinions?<br>
&lt;dael> plinss: Anyone with good info on this issue to help TAG it would be good.<br>
&lt;dael> emilio: If we change to DOM String it makes the private style system build a non-strandard string which is annoying.<br>
&lt;dael> fremy: It would be a mess, switching to surrogate pairs.<br>
&lt;dael> RESOLVED: spec goes with CSSOM String with an issue saying this is discussed by TAG and should resolve in the future<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/687#issuecomment-379669504 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 9 April 2018 08:07:46 UTC