- From: Kruessel, Steffen <Steffen.Kruessel@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2009 09:50:17 +0200
- To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: "Cameron McCormack" <cam@mcc.id.au>, "Marcin Hanclik" <Marcin.Hanclik@access-company.com>, "Giovanni Campagna" <scampa.giovanni@gmail.com>, "WebApps WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, <ian@hixie.ch>
If the extended attribute should not be ECMAScript, the description at http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#Callback must also be revised due to the strong ES-reference. What about [ValueTypeInterface]? Regards, Steffen -----Original Message----- From: Maciej Stachowiak [mailto:mjs@apple.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 9:15 AM To: Marcin Hanclik Cc: Cameron McCormack; Giovanni Campagna; Kruessel, Steffen; WebApps WG; ian@hixie.ch Subject: Re: [WebIDL] Callback, PropertyOnly, NoInterfaceObject On Jun 30, 2009, at 11:29 PM, Marcin Hanclik wrote: > What about [ESNativeObject]? I don't think the property should be ES-specific. It would probably have effects for other language bindings too. I'm also not sure this clarifies the use of Native. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 1 July 2009 07:51:08 UTC