Making DOMPoint a dictionary, as currently proposed, is a problem since it
means other objects (such as the proposed DOMQuad) can't have DOMPoints as
attributes. I'm assuming the WebIDL restriction that attributes can't be
dictionaries is not easily removed.
I think we probably should make DOMPoint a regular interface. For methods
that take DOMPoints as parameters, we can retain the convenient literal
syntax for points by adding a DOMPointLiteral dictionary type and using
union types, e.g.
DOMPoint convertPoint((DOMPoint or DOMPointLiteral) point);
Rob
--
Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni
le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa
stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr,
'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp
waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w *
*