Re: [sensors] No way to express an abstract constructor in WebIDL

I'm personally in the school of being consistent with the existing 
platform (aka pave the cowpaths) unless we have compelling reasons to 
diverge from that.

So I would prefer omitting the constructor as proposed in 
https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/19#issuecomment-103112229 and 
throw a `TypeError` on `new Sensor()`.

That'd be probably what developers would expect, and better developer 
experience. Consider e.g.:

```
new Audio();
// success

new Image();
// success

new HTMLMediaElement();
// Uncaught TypeError: Illegal constructor(…)

new HTMLElement();
// Uncaught TypeError: Illegal constructor(…)

```

```
[NamedConstructor=Audio(...)]
interface HTMLAudioElement : HTMLMediaElement {};

[NamedConstructor=Image(...)]
interface HTMLImageElement : HTMLElement {
};

interface HTMLMediaElement : HTMLElement {
};
```

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by anssiko
Please view or discuss this issue at 
https://github.com/w3c/sensors/issues/19#issuecomment-180358135 using 
your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 5 February 2016 13:31:06 UTC