W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: An import statement for Web IDL

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 02:10:35 -0700
Cc: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, public-webapps@w3.org
Message-id: <9729EAB6-5177-4A76-AEDD-C55E6582AF76@apple.com>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On Jul 2, 2009, at 12:38 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jul 2009, Cameron McCormack wrote:
>> I donít know how important it is to keep the HTML interfaces in the
>> org.w3c.dom.html package, but it definitely seems important to keep  
>> DOM
>> Core and Events interfaces in org.w3c.dom and org.w3c.dom.events.
> Why? How does it affect black-box compliance of Web-relevant
> implementations of those drafts?

It seems to me that there is some benefit to making Java  
implementations of a Web IDL based DOM Core mostly source compatible  
with existing Java DOM bindings. And the cost is low.

I think letting a spec declare a module in one place in prose without  
wrapping all fragments in a module {} declaration could achieve this  
with minimum burden to spec authors.

  - Maciej
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 09:11:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:17 UTC