Re: Showing APIs to the ECMAScript world

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 9, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Micheil Smith wrote:
>> Hmm, that's an alright point, however, if developers are copying and pasting
>> code, then they probably aren't really understanding or caring about what it
>> does.
>>
>> I think it'd make sense to use a sensible default, and then communicate that.
> I tend to agree (I made exactly the same comment previously). I have a feeling this one is going to keep coming up.

I don't think there is a sensible default though. Neither behavior
seems "more right" for a developer that hasn't thought through what
they want.

For the scenario when someone copies code, I think there's at least
some chance that seeing something-timezone-something in the code will
trigger that they should think about timezones.

I'd be fine with changing the API to use a dictionary, as long as we
make the property required (can't be expressed in WebIDL, but can be
expressed in prose).

/ Jonas

Received on Friday, 10 May 2013 01:53:08 UTC