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

Re: Coordination (was: ES6 Modules)

From: Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth@ccs.neu.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 15:52:23 -0400
Message-ID: <CAK=HD+bMKPhmARFsfP2uz2ajCc_er=H0nSbTsT5-vw7H7KdWfA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dirk Pranke <dpranke@chromium.org>
Cc: Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com>, Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Erik Arvidsson <erik.arvidsson@gmail.com>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Dirk Pranke <dpranke@chromium.org> wrote:
>> As far as "outreach", in my own experience whenever I've offered feedback
>> directly to DOM API authors, I'm frequently met with responses such as
>> "that's not consistent with the platform [/end]".
>>> 3) TC39 et al. need to give us a language where we can build sane DOM
>>> APIs without feeling like we need to change the language to do so :).
>> Meanwhile, library authors have no trouble designing sane DOM APIs that
>> web developers enjoy using. The difference: library authors listen to their
>> users, DOM API authors do not.
> Right. This is close to what I was trying to say. TC39 (or at least the
> browser-based implementors who belong to it) has failed thus far to give us
> an environment where it's possible to use libraries trivially and with
> near-zero cost, so it's harder to take the stance that problems should be
> solved in libraries than it should be.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Is it just that JS doesn't
have a module system yet?  What else has TC39 failed to provide?

Also, by definition, there's nothing available to library authors that
isn't available to platform API authors. So I don't see how this is a
reason for the current designs of DOM APIs.

Received on Saturday, 13 April 2013 19:53:10 UTC

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