- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 04:01:46 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25495
Bug ID: 25495
Summary: Behavior of no [Exposed] on interface members is weird
Product: WebAppsWG
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: WebIDL
Assignee: cam@mcc.id.au
Reporter: bzbarsky@mit.edu
QA Contact: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: annevk@annevk.nl, cam@mcc.id.au, mike@w3.org,
public-script-coord@w3.org
The behavior of interface members with no explicit annotation is:
the interface member – or a partial interface definition the interface member
was declared on – was not declared with an [Exposed] extended attribute, and
the ECMAScript global object implements the primary global interface.
That means that if some interface is exposed in workers, all its members _also_
need to be annotated with [Exposed=Workers] (or be in a partial interface thus
annotated). It would make more sense to me to make exposure be true by default
for interface members, so you only need to annotate the ones that shouldn't be
exposed somewhere, no?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 04:01:47 UTC