- From: Travis Leithead <Travis.Leithead@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:42:48 +0000
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- CC: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, "ian@hixie.ch" <ian@hixie.ch>, "Jonas Sicking (jonas@sicking.cc)" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "simonp@opera.com" <simonp@opera.com>
>On 29/08/11 10:59 AM, Cameron McCormack wrote: >>On 12/08/11 2:03 AM, Simon Pieters wrote: >> I tend to agree with Jonas. There's no point in hiding the interface >> name from scripts, it's just a source of potential bugs and confusion. > >I agree here too. I don't see any particular advantage from avoiding >using inheritance here without any messing around of prototypes. +1 This appears to be one of the only cases for [CopyInheritedPrototype] in WebIDL, and if we don't want/need this to be available anywhere else, I'd prefer not to have to support it. -Travis
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2011 23:43:17 UTC