Re: Lazy interface objects?

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011, David Flanagan wrote:
>
> The realistic interoperability requirement for these properties is that 
> they be writeable (i.e. if I set a property to x and then read that 
> property I get the value x back) not that they have a [[Writable]] 
> attribute. Writing the specification at the property descriptor level 
> simplifies things, but seems like a mistake to me.  We don't really need 
> interoperability at the level of getOwnPropertyDescriptor, do we?

They need to be black-box indistinguishable in all implementations, modulo 
hardware limitations. That is, given two compliant browsers implementing 
the same features, there should not be a script that can tell you which 
browser you're running based on logic (i.e. discounting timing attacks, 
measuring memory limitations, etc).

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Thursday, 22 September 2011 01:00:11 UTC