Re: [heycam/webidl] Mixins can lead to empty exposure sets in weird ways (#761) from Anne van Kesteren on 2019-08-05 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from August 2019)

From: Anne van Kesteren <notifications@github.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 06:46:14 -0700
To: heycam/webidl <webidl@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <heycam/webidl/issues/761/518240637@github.com>

Why a superset? If I have interface X exposed to A and B, it seems reasonable to include a mixin Y into X that is exposed to A or B. It does seem reasonable to me that if there's no overlap the inclusion should be invalid.

(Aside: it's always a little weird to me that we have this "extended attribute" concept that's sometimes really core to the infrastructure and sometimes rather optional when evaluating some IDL, but I guess that's how it is and changing that is a large-scale operation best postponed until we have something really good.)

-- 
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/761#issuecomment-518240637

Received on Monday, 5 August 2019 13:46:35 UTC