W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: [WebIDL] Assigning to constants

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:26:55 -0700
Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-Id: <1698E788-1DC8-482B-A775-385A6867B0B8@apple.com>
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>

On Jun 13, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Cameron McCormack wrote:

> Simon Pieters:
>> Ok, good that it is defined.
>> But is there a good reason why it is this way rather than what I'd
>> expected (same as readonly attributes)? I think authors should be  
>> able to
>> rely on constants being, um, constant. No?
> It would make sense that way, yes. :)  Since more browsers allowed
> overwriting it, I specced it that way.  I have no idea if it is
> necessary for web compatibility.  If Moz and Opera people are OK  
> with it
> being changed to being ReadOnly, I can do that.

Safari has always had these constants ReadOnly and we have not had any  
compatibility issues reported as a result, so far as I know.

If it is not a compatibility issue, I think it makes more sense for  
constants to be constant.

Received on Saturday, 14 June 2008 02:27:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:09 UTC