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

Re: [Bindings] extended attribute for callback function interfaces?

From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:54:33 +1100
To: public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <20081124035433.GF6808@arc.mcc.id.au>

Hi David.

Cameron McCormack:
> > [re allowing a Function to implement a callback interface]
> > I believe this is already handled for all such interfaces, in the last
> > paragraph of section 4.4:

L. David Baron:
> I'm not sure if you want it to be handled for all such interfaces.
> You often want this behavior for interfaces that you expect will
> always have a single method, but you may not if they currently have
> one method but you expect more methods to be added via derived
> interfaces (either now or potentially later).

You can now specify [Callback], to allow either a function or a property
on a native object to be the implementation, [Callback=FunctionOnly]
to require it to be the function that is the implementation, and
[Callback=PropertyOnly] to require the property on the object to be the
implementation.

  http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#Callback

> (Also, is "exactly one operation" precisely defined?  You'd want
> this for "exactly one method, and no attributes", and that has to
> include inherited ones.)

I’ve restricted even more what native objects are considered to
implement callback interfaces:

  http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#native-objects

Thanks,

Cameron

-- 
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 03:55:22 GMT

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