- From: Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 16:50:54 -0400
- To: Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>
- Cc: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
Dare I say ecma-speak? (Maybe I got stockholm-syndrome?) On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com> > wrote: >> >> Folks, >> >> Many specs nowadays opt for a more imperative method of expressing >> normative requirements, and using algorithms. For example, both HTML and DOM >> spec do the "run following steps" list that looks a lot like pseudocode, and >> the Web components specs use their own flavor of prose-pseudo-code. >> >> I wonder if it would be good the pseudo-code would actually be ES6, with >> comments where needed? >> >> I noticed that the CSS Color Module Level 4 actually does this, and it >> seems pretty nice: >> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css-color/#dom-rgbcolor-rgbcolorcolor >> >> WDYT? > > > I love the idea of specifying algorithms in something other than English. > But I'm afraid that ECMAScript is not a good language for this purpose, for > the same reasons Boris cites in his response (which arrived as I was typing > this). > > - Adam -- erik
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2015 20:51:52 UTC