W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-svg-wg@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: Browsers and ECMAscript editions

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 06:18:10 -0700
Cc: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>, 'Oliver Hunt' <oliver@apple.com>, SVG Working Group WG <public-svg-wg@w3.org>
Message-id: <94626680-CA70-4532-AE6B-0E3F6E360BAF@apple.com>
To: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>

On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:01 AM, Robin Berjon wrote:

> On Jul 12, 2010, at 20:59 , Chris Lilley wrote:
>> LR> The other related issue is where E4X (ECMA-357) comes inů
>> 
>> Did you ever see the 'Highlander' movie series?
>> 
>> In one of them, they basically pretended that the previous film in the series had never happened, so episode n was effectively followed by episode n+2.
>> 
>> Same deal with ES4.
> 
> Heh. But I think the OP wasn't talking about ES4 but rather E4X (ECMAScript for XML), which at some point was part of ES4 but was released separately so as to ship at all. That being said, while very interesting, it seems to have failed to pick up much momentum.

E4X was never part of ES4. In fact, it predates ES4, and it was always a separate spec from ECMA-262 (the main ECMAScript spec). Nowadays, most in the ECMAScript standards community consider E4X a somewhat regrettable direction and there is little interest in moving forward with it.

Going back to the actual topic of this thread, I do think it would be appropriate to cite ECMA-262 5th edition.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 11 August 2010 13:18:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:12 UTC