- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 14:14:32 -0400
- To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On 10/16/16 12:46 PM, Rik Cabanier wrote: > Looking at > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2016JanMar/0014.html, it > looks like a WebIDL requirement. > Boris, SimonP, can you comment on this? WebIDL provides a convenient syntax for the common case for serializers. It _does_ allow you do define a totally custom serializer, like so: serializer; and then defining its behavior in prose however you want. But note that the serializer syntax is in flux because it's overcomplicated already; see <https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/188>. That said, we should leave some way of specifying a completely custom serializer, but I see no reason it shouldn't just be the declaration of a method named toJSON which you then define in prose as usual to return whatever you want to return. -Boris
Received on Sunday, 16 October 2016 18:15:05 UTC