- From: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 18:27:08 +0000
- To: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>
- CC: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, "es-discuss@mozilla.org" <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
> From: Cameron McCormack [mailto:cam@mcc.id.au] > > Brendan Eich: > > As noted, they started out that way 17 years ago. I think WebIDL and > > interface-based method definition made onload, e.g., predefined on > > window objects, or more recently on Window.prototype. Was this useful? > > Was it intended specifically (for window, not just intended generally > > due to WebIDL's uniform rules for binding its definitions in JS)? > > I don't think it provides any benefit. Uniformity is the only reason the spec > says they should be there, currently. It does provide the monkey-patch benefit for "shared" interfaces (e.g., those shared by inheritance). At the present time, the only one I can think of that [will] act like this is EventTarget (IE10 hasn't yet implemented this hierarchy change).
Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 18:27:41 UTC