- From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 14:43:41 +0200
- To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
- CC: "public-media-annotation@w3.org" <public-media-annotation@w3.org>
Doug, Thanks for your response on the use of Web IDL for our API spec. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-media-annotation/2009Sep/0003.html You say that WebIDL pros are 1) it provides ECMAscript (Javascript) and Java bindings as a single declaration 2) it is easier to write 3) it is more precise I have read that Web IDL is a variant of Object Management Group’s IDL How different is WebIDL vs IDL OMG ? Lots of differences ? The Annot WG is interested in using Web IDL. Would you or someone from the Web Applications WG would be willing to give us a help to use it to describe our API, as there is no knowledge of it in our WG. I have seen that HTML does use WebIDL for JavaScript bindings. http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html This comforts the WG for using WebIDl as it is still an unstable Working Draft. Thierry
Received on Wednesday, 9 September 2009 12:44:03 UTC