- From: Yehuda Katz <wycats@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 23:40:26 -0700
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org, Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, es-discuss Steen <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Sep 25, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 25, 2009, at 9:38 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote: >>> >>> Another way to put my earlier concern >>> >>> Sorry, what earlier concern? You are replying to my reply to Doug >>> Schepers >>> on a sub-thread where I didn't see a message from you. >> >> So confusing! So many messages! > > No, you just replied off-topic and rehashed an issue that we all agree needs > fixing, seemingly as if I had implied that it wasn't an issue. Although the > generous citations of my reply to Doug Schepers that you included of course > implied nothing of the kind. > > Why did you do that? I failed? There are about 100 messages on this topic that I'm reading and trying to digest. There's a whole lot of history involved. In the end, I can only speak for myself, and I can say that I'm personally having a lot of trouble trying to piece things together by looking at the specifications. > > [big snip] > >> My point is that understanding the semantics of the language as >> implemented by browser vendors is not possible by reading the language >> spec. These is not some hypothetical extension, but a mandatory way >> that ECMAScript implemented for the web must behave. > > Well, duh. > > We seem to agree, perhaps vehemently :-/. > > One last time, for the record: it is a bug in ES specs that you can't follow > th > The whole point of bothering the HTML WG, public-webapps, and es-discuss > about collaboration between Ecma and W3C folks has been to fill gaps between > specs and reality. We had some false starts in my view (like trying to move > ES WebIDL bindings to Ecma up front, or ever). But the issues laid out in > Sam's original cross-post were exactly the "gaps" between ES specs, HTML5 > ones, and browser implementations. At last some of the gaps are filled in > HTML5 but not in ways that can be injected directly into ES specs. I'm actually being a bit more radical than you are (perhaps naïvely). I am personally finding WebIDL to be a blocker to understanding. That's because it's another spec that interacts with two other (fairly complex) specs in unpredictable and context-sensitive ways. > We should fix the ES specs, and make whatever changes follow to the HTML5 > specs. And maybe use WebIDL to constrain "host objects". All this has been > said on the thread already. Were you not reading the messages I was? I think I saw that in the thread ;) Like I said, my problem is that the interaction between the three specs is making it nearly impossible for a casual reader to understand what's going on. I strongly apologize for not being clearer about that; I'm only starting to fully understand the source of my own confusion. > > /be > > -- Yehuda Katz Developer | Engine Yard (ph) 718.877.1325
Received on Saturday, 26 September 2009 06:41:26 UTC