Re: [w3c/manifest] Use WebIDL to describe the manifest data structure (#611)

Hmm. I mean, it sure is useful to be able to reuse the syntax and all of the semantics except for 2 type conversion rules that we want to be less strict (in one case) and more strict (in another case).

Arguably these rule changes could be useful in more places than just the manifest spec. Like, we have extended attributes to change how other fields are processed (e.g., `[Clamp]`, `[EnforceRange]`) which seem to be defined because the old way was too lax, but we can't change the default. It seems that `[StrictString]` for strings would be no stranger than `[EnforceRange]` for integers. So I wouldn't say it's a different language, just a slightly different requirement for how to process some types. And that's exactly what extended IDL attributes are for.

-- 
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-445703236