Re: [w3c/manifest] Use WebIDL to describe the manifest data structure (#611) from Anne van Kesteren on 2017-09-28 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from September 2017)

From: Anne van Kesteren <notifications@github.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 00:27:04 -0700
To: w3c/manifest <manifest@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <w3c/manifest/issues/611/332751867@github.com>

> What is your overall opinion on whether this is worth it?

It seems reasonable as long as it's well-defined. And as long as you stick to dictionaries there's not much room for collateral damage. If we get more consumers (e.g., Origin Policy would be a good candidate) we should maybe uplift this to IDL somehow.

> I'm not sure how we reconcile the JSON naming vs DOM API naming issues.

Nothing blocks you from using the JSON names, but I'm also not sure we actually want to use that naming convention for all JSON... Certainly reporting infrastructure uses different names and I hope Origin Policy would too.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/611#issuecomment-332751867

Received on Thursday, 28 September 2017 07:27:28 UTC