W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: [WebIDL] Treatment of getters and setters

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 00:39:19 -0800
Message-ID: <49212DB7.1050209@sicking.cc>
To: public-webapps@w3.org, public-html@w3.org

Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Hello WGs.
> 
> I’ve just committed changes to Web IDL on how it treats index and name
> getters and setters.  Browers don’t agree on some specifics of how the
> index and name properties on HTMLCollections are handled, so I’ve tried
> to make some sensible decisions in these cases.  Comments welcome!
> 
> Here’s a summary of changes to Web IDL:
> 
>   * Removed [IndexGetter], [IndexSetter], [NamedGetter] and
>     [NamedSetter].
> 
>   * Removed the custom [[Get]] behaviour on host objects.
> 
>   * Added [NumberedIndex] and [NamedIndex], which can appear on
>     interfaces.  Both of these can take identifier arguments Creatable,
>     Modifiable and/or Deletable, which control how the properties that
>     are placed on host objects can be interacted with.  Properties for
>     [NumberedIndex] are enumerable, and those for [NamedIndex] aren’t.
> 
>   * Changed the custom [[Put]] behaviour on host objects so that it
>     only is there to support [PutForwards].
> 
> For details see:
> 
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#NamedIndex
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#NumberedIndex
>   http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#index-properties

It seems very unfortunate that we now have to use prose to describe 
which functions the getters/setters map to. Why was that part of these 
changes needed?

/ Jonas
Received on Monday, 17 November 2008 08:41:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:28 GMT