W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: partial interfaces, [NoInterfaceObject]

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:47:41 +0000
Message-ID: <CADnb78hayC4MN9Q5C92gMRMya51LOg6jK4Wg6KzNsoiZ6PBTQg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> There's also a cost for implementations and authors that read the spec
> that there are additional interfaces to juggle. I.e. when you see the
> "interface NavigatorGeolocation { ... }", you have to remember (or
> look up) that there's a "Navigator implements NavigatorGeolocation" to
> know that that API appears on the navigator object. I.e. the
> "implements" add an extra level of indirection which complicates the
> mental model.

Yeah, we could just have partial interface X, Y { }; to solve this.
Seems a lot cleaner. Also, now we have [Exposed] the worker setup
could be much simpler.

Received on Friday, 14 February 2014 19:48:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:19 UTC