- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:09:33 -0400
- To: tobie@sensors.codespeaks.com, public-script-coord@w3.org
- CC: Mounir Lamouri <mounir@lamouri.fr>, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
On 6/10/15 5:38 AM, Tobie Langel wrote: > Adding support for partial enums in WebIDL would do the trick. This came up before in https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27048 yes? Not hat any conclusions were reached... > Is that doable? Else what other option would allow for this use case? Either using a string or modifying the base specification that defines the enum. I should note that the concern over fragmented specs is very real. There are some working groups producing lots of small specs with intricate and hidden interdependencies that are hellish to implement (or indeed to understand; you have to read all of them, including ones not referenced from the one you're reading, to understand how the spec you're reading works). The permissions example is not quite that extreme, I guess... -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 10 June 2015 14:10:09 UTC