- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 14:32:31 +1000
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- CC: "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Boris Zbarsky wrote: > I have a few questions about the definition of "single operation > interface" at > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#dfn-single-operation-interface : > > 1) Given that > http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/#dfn-callback-interface says: > > Callback interfaces MUST NOT have any have any consequential > interfaces > > why is the second item in the bullet list needed? I guess it's not, if I change the definition to "single operation callback interface". http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/Overview.xml.diff?r1=1.653;r2=1.654;f=h http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/v1.xml.diff?r1=1.93;r2=1.94;f=h > 2) Should static attributes prevent an interface from being a single > operation interface? It's not obvious to me why, but per spec > right now they do. Static attributes (and operations) shouldn't be allowed on callback interfaces at all. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/Overview.xml.diff?r1=1.654;r2=1.655;f=h http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/webapi/WebIDL/v1.xml.diff?r1=1.94;r2=1.95;f=h > 3) The "no others" in the last bullet point is ambiguous: does it > mean "no other regular operations" or "no other operations"? > This is related to item #2 above, of course. Now that static operations are disallowed, the ambiguity should be resolved.
Received on Friday, 2 August 2013 04:33:07 UTC