Re: IDL: number types from Boris Zbarsky on 2013-03-20 (public-script-coord@w3.org from January to March 2013)

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 12:13:58 -0400
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <5149E046.8020409@mit.edu>

On 3/20/13 9:50 AM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> However, the octet behavior could be redefined in prose if need be.

Please let's not do that.  The point of having a single IDL spec for 
stuff like this is to avoid every single spec that wants the behavior 
having to (probably buggily) define it in prose.

> I think the are potentially helpful, but you could have them as generic prose algorithms and not part of WebIDL itself.

I would be fine with generic prose algorithms in a centralized location, 
so they're only done once.  But what's the benefit of that over having 
them just available in IDL?

-Boris

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 16:14:27 UTC