W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > April to June 2013

Coordination (was: ES6 Modules)

From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:51:15 +0200
Message-ID: <5166B1C3.4030609@w3.org>
To: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>
CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth@ccs.neu.edu>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson@gmail.com>
On 09/04/2013 16:51 , Brendan Eich wrote:
> First, this cuts both ways. Do you really want to get into the times
> even in the modern era, even in the last three years, when a W3C/WHATWG
> (the two are diverging again) piece of spec-work was done without
> consulting with es-discuss or any such group, resulting in a less than
> ideal JS API? I am not going to throw that stone, it's not my point. I'm
> asking you to refrain as well.

It most certainly cuts both ways. What I'd be interested in though is if 
there's anything we can do to make it not cut at all.

You mention reviewing JS APIs; we're working on quite a few of those  
and we really want all the feedback we can get.

Is there a simple, lightweight process that would ensure everyone's 
aware of ongoing work? I am loath to head towards something formal, but 
at our end we can certainly agitate for an informal rule like "Whenever 
you produce a new API, or a major redesign, you must ping 

I don't have a set idea as to how to improve this; suggestions are very 
welcome. My point is: if you want to review APIs, we're more than happy 
to facilitate that.

> Second, there is a list, public-script-coord@w3.org, cc'ed here, where
> this thread started, and which has existed all along, precisely to
> improve let's say "DOM"/"JS" coordination and API quality. We've used it
> from the es-discuss side. If it should have been used for something to
> do with modules, there's still time.

We could definitely use increased awareness of what you're working on. I 
think a lot of people on this side are still under the impression that 
TC39 disappeared down a hole to work on ES4 and never came out. I'm not 
saying that it's justified, just that it's the sort of perception that 
we ought to dispel.

Judging from the first reactions we're getting with Futures (mostly 
involving people staring like rabbits about to splat) we already need to 
do some outreach on this side, but it would certainly be helpful to get 
the occasional heads up for features that will definitely have a strong 
impact on API design and the platform in general. Modules are 
*definitely* a candidate for that treatment.

Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 12:51:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:12 UTC