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

[Bug 22824] Remove Date from WebIDL

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 21:39:13 +0000
To: public-script-coord@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-22824-3890-rM42HgB75P@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |waldron.rick@gmail.com

--- Comment #8 from Rick Waldron <waldron.rick@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I think Date's disadvantages have been dramatically overstated. See bug
> 22714 comment 13 and 22714 comment 14. HTML uses Date in two places,
> media.startDate() 

startDate is an attribute of media elements, not a method—correct? Here is my
response to Anne, re: media.startDate

> and input.valueAsDate (the latter is unfortunately an
> attribute, not a method, but returns a new value each time, which isn't
> idiomatic, but it's already deployed, so whatever), and I would certainly
> consider using it again where appropriate (e.g. on the <time> element's API).

Later in that thread, I identified this list: (copied verbatim)

Time and/or timestamps represented as milliseconds since epoch, in the form
of a number, is useful for:
1. calculating time differences with math (without coercing the object into
a milliseconds number)
2. creating new Date objects if such a thing is necessary for the program
3. being the value of a property on a frozen object
4. being the value of a property who's descriptor is {[[Writable]]: false,
[[Enumerable]]: false, [[Configurable]]: false}


My list and your list https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22714#c13
share a lot of overlap, however my #3 and #4 trump the pros for Date object.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 14 August 2013 21:39:14 UTC

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