RE: Web IDL spec.

Hi. Doug.
Thanks for your good information.

I didn't read the WebIDL specification yet,
But I agree WebIDL is good candidates for defining our APIs when I look at the your email and other specifications in W3C.

Best regards,
Wonsuk


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-media-annotation-request@w3.org [mailto:public-media-
> annotation-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Doug Schepers
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 10:49 PM
> To: Thierry Michel
> Cc: public-media-annotation@w3.org; Cameron McCormack
> Subject: Re: Web IDL spec.
> 
> 
> Hi, Thierry-
> 
> Thierry Michel wrote (on 9/2/09 9:18 AM):
> > Doug,
> >
> > The Web Applications Working Group, has published on 19 December 2008 a
> > Working draft "Web IDL"
> >
> > The Media Annotations Working Group is looking for an interface
> > definition language for a client-side API for cross-community data
> > integration of information related to media objects on the Web and
> > providing partial mappings between the existing formats.
> > This API would provide methods for client side processing.
> >
> > Would Web IDL be the proper language for this purpose ?
> 
> Certainly.  It has three chief advantages over other IDL languages (such
> as he OMG IDL traditionally used in W3C specs):
> 
> 1) it provides ECMAscript (Javascript) and Java bindings as a single
> declaration
> 2) it is easier to write
> 3) it is more precise
> 
> For this reason, it's being used in HTML5 and several other recent
> specifications.  I am leaning toward using it for DOM3 Events, as well
> (though that would mean a rewrite of parts of DOM3 Events, I think it's
> worth it).
> 
> 
> > What is the status of "Web IDL", and when do you plan to go to Last
> > Call. Would it be mature enough for the Media Annotations WG to rely on
> > it ?
> 
> It is a bit of an unusual beast... since it is not intended to be
> implemented directly as software, but rather to be used in other
> specifications, the CR criteria are not as clear.  Until the other
> specifications that use Web IDL go to Rec, Web IDL won't be completely
> stable, because there may be details that need to change upon further
> examination.  However, it is relatively stable now, and we believe it
> will go to LC in a month or two.
> 
> 
> > Thanks for your hints,
> 
> Thanks for looking into this.  We hope you will decide to use Web IDL,
> since it will make the implementation more consistent with other
> technologies that use it.
> 
> Regards-
> -Doug Schepers
> W3C Team Contact, SVG and WebApps WGs

Received on Friday, 4 September 2009 02:38:57 UTC