- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 15:17:19 +0200
- To: "Cameron McCormack" <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Cc: "Garrett Smith" <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>, "Erik Arvidsson" <arv@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 23:06:08 +0200, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
wrote:
> Anne van Kesteren:
>> Yeah, it would be nice if sequence mapped to that so that NodeList
>> could be defined as a sequence instead, same for StyleSheetList,
>> etc. And then Web IDL would take care of all the details rather than
>> each specification.
>
> I don’t know that sequence is appropriate for this. They are meant to
> be for pass-by-value lists.
I'm not sure I follow this. Could you elaborate a bit?
> Is the issue here that you can’t use a base interface because then you
> would lose some type specificity, e.g.
>
> interface Collection {
> attribute unsigned long length;
> getter any item(unsigned long index);
> }
>
> where you need to use “any” because you don’t know what the type of the
> derived interface elements will be?
Well, and you would need to define that base interface somewhere and all
other specifications would need to use it. But I thought this was the
point of sequence. I have been using it that way in the CSSOM at least to
replace all these dreaded SomethingList interfaces/objects. Maybe we
should introduce something else for it?
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 29 October 2010 13:18:22 UTC