RE: Object.observe()able properties on the web platform from Domenic Denicola on 2014-08-20 (public-script-coord@w3.org from July to September 2014)

From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:56:41 +0000
To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1408561001611.70432@domenicdenicola.com>

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>

> Well, still, reversing the question - are enough properties observable that it would be better to have an [Unobservable] extended attribute for them, and assume that anything else is observable?  Would really cut down on the IDL spam.

I guess I was approaching it from the perspective that implementing observability requires extra work, and so calling that out as an attribute makes most sense. That is a somewhat implementer-ey perspective, though.

Received on Wednesday, 20 August 2014 18:57:13 UTC