Re: Web IDL Garden Hose (was: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination)

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Brendan Eich <> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 2009, at 11:20 PM, Yehuda Katz wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:15 PM, Brendan Eich <>
>> 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 na´vely).
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

> /be

Yehuda Katz
Developer | Engine Yard
(ph) 718.877.1325

Received on Saturday, 26 September 2009 06:41:26 UTC