Re: Web IDL syntax

On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 09:07:22 +0200, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>  
wrote:

> Cameron McCormack:
>> Following are my half baked proposals.
>
> I’ve now baked all of these proposals into the spec, except for the one
> about allowing multiple module levels with a module declaration (i.e.,
> ‘module a::b::c’).
>
>   * Made ‘in’ optional
>     http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#idl-operations

Having it optional will likely lead to inconsistently written IDLs, which  
can be confusing. I think it would be better to either require it (as  
legacy cruft, basically) or remove it altogether (the relevant IDLs will  
need to be rewritten anyway for the other changes).

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software

Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 10:17:03 UTC