Re: [heycam/webidl] No seemingly consistent Shepherd story (#240)

> The whole point of Web IDL having IDL -> JS conversion rules is because it's converting from one well-defined type system to the other.

I haven't suggested anywhere we should drop the conversion rules. 

I've asked two things:

1. Whether we should be more consistent in how we talk about "kinds" throughout platform specifications. I think it's confusing that the same prose in an IDL-interface-member algorithm can make the distinction between record types and records, but has no such way of talking about URL records.
2. Whether we should consolidate lists and sequences, maps and records, and similar things. That sometimes you deal with a list of strings and sometimes with a list of elements is currently just something we state somewhere. Personally I think that's enough and allows implementations to make the same kind of implementation decisions as we provide with annotations such as ASCII string. I don't think we need to go all the way and define specific append/remove operations for sequences/records/etc.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/240#issuecomment-262283081