- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 18:40:56 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=16536 --- Comment #3 from Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> 2012-03-30 18:40:55 UTC --- Ok, I see why now I am getting generally confused (over and over again). I think you need to make it super clear what is actually happening in this spec... well in the ECMAScript "binding" section at least (for us noobies that just rush into the interesting ECMAScript section). The assumption I was working under has been wrong: I thought the ECMAScript binding section was about passing values and type checking them... which it kinda is... but I was missing one crucial step: the conversion to the abstract/language-independent WebIDL types. So, it should be made clear at the start of the ECMAScript binding section that... with regards to what it means to "bind" (or whatever): ECMAScript goes in -> gets abstracted to the appropriate WebIDL type (or throws TypeError if fails)... some of these types resemble ECMAScript types (e.g., Date)... but they are NOT ECMAScript types... they just look like them for convenience (or really just to confuse Marcos!:)). ECMAScript gets requested -> Browser converts WebIDL canonical type to ECMAScript -> out comes ECMAScript value. Hopefully I've now understood it correctly (and I'll stop getting things ass-backwards!). -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Friday, 30 March 2012 18:40:58 UTC