- From: Michael van Ouwerkerk <mvanouwerkerk@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 16:50:44 +0000
- To: public-script-coord@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAF40kP6+29F36-HM0H8C=nsen5MYZxCsMjj-2j08OXHna__SNA@mail.gmail.com>
(please CC me in any responses, as I'm not subscribed to public-script-coord@w3.org) Hi, I'm looking for some guidance on the use of partial interfaces, and also of [NoInterfaceObject]. This came up when reviewing feedback on snippets of WebIDL in the Geolocation API. It was suggested that this form: [NoInterfaceObject] interface NavigatorGeolocation { readonly attribute Geolocation geolocation; }; Navigator implements NavigatorGeolocation; Should be replaced by this form: partial interface Navigator { readonly attribute Geolocation geolocation; }; This change seems to make sense as it is less verbose, and there's no need for multiple interfaces to implement this. Is there any further guidance on pros and cons? The other thing that came up was that generally [NoInterfaceObject] should be removed unless there is a good reason to have it. For example "The Geolocation interface should not have [NoInterfaceObject]." This part makes less sense to me. What are the reasons for exposing an object like this in the global namespace? It seems to have little use, but perhaps for feature detection. Still, that can also be done by checking for the presence of window.navigator.geolocation. Regards, Michael
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 16:51:14 UTC