W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re: [geometry] DOMRectReadOnly serializer

From: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 20:10:35 -0700
Cc: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-id: <DBF911C7-AAA2-46ED-B5EA-D748EE71C919@me.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
> On Oct 16, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu <mailto:bzbarsky@mit.edu>> wrote:
> On 10/16/16 12:46 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote:
> Looking at
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2016JanMar/0014.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2016JanMar/0014.html>, it
> looks like a WebIDL requirement.
> Boris, SimonP, can you comment on this?
> 
> WebIDL provides a convenient syntax for the common case for serializers.
> 
> It _does_ allow you do define a totally custom serializer, like so:
> 
>   serializer;
> 
> and then defining its behavior in prose however you want.
> 
> But note that the serializer syntax is in flux because it's overcomplicated already; see <https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/188 <https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/188>>.  That said, we should leave some way of specifying a completely custom serializer, but I see no reason it shouldn't just be the declaration of a method named toJSON which you then define in prose as usual to return whatever you want to return.
> 
> Since this feature is still being developed, maybe it shouldn't be implemented yet and we should be removed from the spec (or put at risk, moved to level 2, etc).

I think you can say serializer = { x, y, width, height } to get the desired behavior.

Simon
Received on Monday, 17 October 2016 03:11:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 17 October 2016 03:11:10 UTC