- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 18:14:05 +1000
- To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
- CC: public-script-coord@w3.org, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>
On 9/09/11 4:45 PM, Alex Russell wrote: > Wait, why shouldn't I be able to new-up a CharachterData item? It's more of an abstract interface/class. There's no DOM Node type that corresponds to CharacterData. > And in any case, if the *default* is to want this, why not simply flip > things the other way, add a new noconstructor attribute or similar? Flipping the default isn't going to cause useful constructors to exist. Specification writers need to write the actual behaviour for these constructors whether they are implicitly declared or not. I think the right thing to do here is just to file bugs on specifications and get them to add constructors for existing interfaces. This has already started happening recently with the Event interfaces.
Received on Friday, 9 September 2011 08:14:50 UTC