W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Web IDL sequence<T> and item() method

From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:55:21 +0000
To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
Cc: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Message-ID: <A9E639B00F57422F89C554BF872718B3@marcosc.com>

On Sunday, 11 December 2011 at 12:21, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 19:51:48 +0100, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com (mailto:glenn@skynav.com)> wrote:
> > If the answer is that no item() method is implied, then does the use of
> > sequence<T> in these newer specs entail dropping this method (with 
> > respect to prior DOM specs)?
> The DOM specifications probably need to move back to using interface 
> rather than sequence. I was hoping sequence would define the whole 
> collection thing magically, but it never turned out that way. Still not 
> quite sure what the real use case is for sequence.

I'm also unsure as to the purpose of sequence in practice. Perhaps some examples of expected usage would help a bit? 
Received on Sunday, 11 December 2011 12:56:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:37 UTC