- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:12:02 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23225
Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |robin@w3.org
--- Comment #7 from Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org> ---
(In reply to Anne from comment #4)
> This is the conversation. I think rather than dropping IDL wholesale, it'll
> be easier to improve it incrementally in the direction of something that
> better matches a theoretical JSIDL.
I'm not entirely convinced that incremental improvement is the best strategy in
this specific case.
A lot of drafts out there are using WebIDL. If we do incremental improvements
by removing stuff, we'll break them (they'll get fixed over time, but it won't
be pleasant). If we do it by keeping existing constructs alive, we'll end up
with a crufty language. Not everything needs the same upgrading strategies as
the web.
If we get something new and nicer, people can switch over wholesale.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Friday, 13 September 2013 09:12:03 UTC