W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > July to September 2013

WebIDL question (was: DOMPoint dictionary problem)

From: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:46:09 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGN7qDAspa0p6Sbm2qGdyEcywYbMXE-icAvUDVNkyYwYve2VXQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: Jet Villegas W3C <w3c@junglecode.net>, Cameron McCormack <heycam@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mozilla.com>, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>wrote:

> 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.

Why can't interfaces have dictionary attributes in IDL?

> 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);
Received on Tuesday, 24 September 2013 18:46:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:46 UTC