- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 10:50:55 -0400
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- CC: public-script-coord@w3.org
On 6/7/12 1:38 AM, Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Because dictionaries are meant to be "pass by value" types, like
> sequences. Because you would be returning a plain JS object – and a new
> one each time at that – it wouldn't be suitable for use as an attribute
> type.
I see. It's perhaps worth having an informative note in the spec to
this effect....
> just as if you were allowed to have:
>
> interface A {
> sequence<long> xs;
Huh. I hadn't realized sequences were not valid for attributes. Looks
like that's enforced on the syntax level, unlike dictionaries. OK.
-Boris
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2012 14:51:26 UTC