W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: Standardizing console APIs: Where?

From: Mark S. Miller <erights@google.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:42:26 -0800
Message-ID: <CABHxS9j+j43-nKrpv5KNFvv_AtmBXRYmB_j7DRYSajQYecADvw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com>
Cc: Jorge Chamorro <jorge@jorgechamorro.com>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>, "Hill, Clint" <clint.hill@goaaa.com>
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:

> It seems that I may have mixed a few assumptions from side conversations
> on twitter/chat and been less clear than I could have been.
>
> My question here was really a few fold:
>
> 1. Does anyone else feel like we _should_ have a standard
>

I feel strongly that console should be standardized.



> 2. Given that this goes beyond the browser, where should that standard
> live?  I feel like its proper home is ECMA since the API, again, has not
> really anything to do with browser necessarily.
>

I agree.



> 3. If ECMA, is it part of the language (ES7?) or is it separate like i18n?
>  I was actually suggesting that my opinion is the later, this feels like an
> ECMA module that could use standardization and is commonly imported in
> browsers and many engines for back-compat as 'console' (though I suggesting
> 'logging' is a better API term).  I also suggested (in the strawman) that
> it could start _very_ small with the abstract APIs that are at least
> universally non-breaking (even if they might do something slightly
> different) and have been fermented for years and years - thus it should
> mostly be an easy approval to find a home and basis on which to gather
> proposals and consensus
>
> Those are my merely opinions and rationale - I am happy to be wrong on any
> of them :)
>

Both could work. My first reaction is that it makes more sense to propose
this for ES7, rather than create a separate track. But I don't have any
strong basis for this. It does meet the same enabling criteria as i18n: It
is largely orthogonal from the rest of ES7 and so need not be synchronized
with it.




>
> -Brian
>
>
>


-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 00:42:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:30:09 UTC