- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:06:21 -0700
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
- Cc: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: >> This was already discussed: >> >> http://www.w3.org/mid/CAAWBYDDF1fRrJj08AvFARfCstkQfgg=RH85n-UPh3ZZ_fjc2wA@mail.gmail.com > > Can we describe in IDL that the interface DOMPoint inherits from the > dictionary DOMPointLiteral? > It seems that there are some subtle differences between attributes and > dictionary member that is otherwise lost. There's no need to do any of this. It's very simple and easy. A DOMPoint satisfies the definition of a DOMPointLiteral - it's an object with the necessary named attributes. As long as we're not trying to do anything fancy just with "real" DOMPoints (which we aren't, and shouldn't), then just having the methods take a DOMPointLiteral is all we need to do. A dictionary isn't a real "thing". It's just a description of a "shape" that objects have to have. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2013 19:07:08 UTC