- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 09:21:17 -0700
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 4:23 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > On Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:22:21 +0200, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I added the definitions of DOMPoint and DOMPointLiteral to DOMMatrix [1] >> for now. We may move it to CSSOM View or any other spec where it makes sense >> to define it. Please comment if you have concerns about the IDL or >> definitions. >> >> Greetings, >> Dirk >> >> [1] http://dev.w3.org/fxtf/matrix/ > > > Why define a constructor for DOMPoint when DOMPointLiteral can be used? Why not? Constructors are easy and an expected part of the platform. Authors find it weird when they don't exist. Just relying on the dictionary means that a list of "points" might be a mixture of DOMPoints and Objects, which could be confusing. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 23 September 2013 16:22:03 UTC