W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2011

Re: WebIDL Identifier and static operations

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 10:36:45 +1200
To: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
Cc: public-script-coord <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20110508223645.GC23801@wok.mcc.id.au>
Dominique Hazael-Massieux:
> The WebIDL spec says 
>         The "omittable" keyword MUST NOT appear on an operation that has
>         no identifier.
> I expect the same applies to static operations — if so, this should
> probably appear in the spec. Maybe both should be reflected in the
> grammar.

The term “operation” here does encompass all three of regular
operations, special operations and static operations.  The grammar only
allows “omittable” to be used if it’s followed by one or more special
keywords, so I don’t think we need any further wording to disallow it.

It would be nice if the grammar enforced the “omittable operations must
have an identifier” rule, although I suspect it would result in a bit of
repetition.  For now I think it’s OK to rely on the prose restriction.

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Sunday, 8 May 2011 22:37:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:03 UTC