W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2009

Re: Web IDL Garden Hose (was: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination)

From: Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 23:40:26 -0700
Message-ID: <245fb4700909252340q4ad55e05v1f9fd8057b8b73dc@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, es-discuss Steen <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 25, 2009, at 9:38 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>>>
>>> Another way to put my earlier concern
>>>
>>> Sorry, what earlier concern? You are replying to my reply to Doug
>>> Schepers
>>> on a sub-thread where I didn't see a message from you.
>>
>> So confusing! So many messages!
>
> No, you just replied off-topic and rehashed an issue that we all agree needs
> fixing, seemingly as if I had implied that it wasn't an issue. Although the
> generous citations of my reply to Doug Schepers that you included of course
> implied nothing of the kind.
>
> Why did you do that?

I failed? There are about 100 messages on this topic that I'm reading
and trying to digest. There's a whole lot of history involved. In the
end, I can only speak for myself, and I can say that I'm personally
having a lot of trouble trying to piece things together by looking at
the specifications.

>
> [big snip]
>
>> My point is that understanding the semantics of the language as
>> implemented by browser vendors is not possible by reading the language
>> spec. These is not some hypothetical extension, but a mandatory way
>> that ECMAScript implemented for the web must behave.
>
> Well, duh.
>
> We seem to agree, perhaps vehemently :-/.
>
> One last time, for the record: it is a bug in ES specs that you can't follow
> th
> The whole point of bothering the HTML WG, public-webapps, and es-discuss
> about collaboration between Ecma and W3C folks has been to fill gaps between
> specs and reality. We had some false starts in my view (like trying to move
> ES WebIDL bindings to Ecma up front, or ever). But the issues laid out in
> Sam's original cross-post were exactly the "gaps" between ES specs, HTML5
> ones, and browser implementations. At last some of the gaps are filled in
> HTML5 but not in ways that can be injected directly into ES specs.

I'm actually being a bit more radical than you are (perhaps na´vely).
I am personally finding WebIDL to be a blocker to understanding.
That's because it's another spec that interacts with two other (fairly
complex) specs in unpredictable and context-sensitive ways.

> We should fix the ES specs, and make whatever changes follow to the HTML5
> specs. And maybe use WebIDL to constrain "host objects". All this has been
> said on the thread already. Were you not reading the messages I was?

I think I saw that in the thread ;)

Like I said, my problem is that the interaction between the three
specs is making it nearly impossible for a casual reader to understand
what's going on. I strongly apologize for not being clearer about
that; I'm only starting to fully understand the source of my own
confusion.

>
> /be
>
>

-- 
Yehuda Katz
Developer | Engine Yard
(ph) 718.877.1325
Received on Saturday, 26 September 2009 06:41:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:08 UTC