- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:19:11 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22824
--- Comment #10 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> So how are you handling `input.valueAsDate.setFullYear(1998)`?
It doesn't do anything useful (the returned Date is changed then GC'ed).
(In reply to comment #7)
> Hixie, if you disagree with the conclusion about Dates I would suggest
> jumping in on the thread on es-discuss. As things stand I'm inclined to go
> with TC39s consensus.
It's not clear to me why that's the right forum for talking about an HTML spec
feature.
(In reply to comment #8)
> startDate is an attribute of media elements, not a method—correct?
It changed to a method recently.
> -------------------------------
> Time and/or timestamps represented as milliseconds since epoch, in the form
> of a number, is useful for:
> 1. calculating time differences with math (without coercing the object into
> a milliseconds number)
> 2. creating new Date objects if such a thing is necessary for the program
> 3. being the value of a property on a frozen object
> 4. being the value of a property who's descriptor is {[[Writable]]: false,
> [[Enumerable]]: false, [[Configurable]]: false}
> -------------------------------
>
>
> My list and your list
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22714#c13 share a lot of
> overlap
(Not coincidentally, I read your e-mail while writing that comment.)
> however my #3 and #4 trump the pros for Date object.
I don't understand how your #3 and #4 are relevant. They seem like theoretical
purity, which is the least important consideration in what we often call the
"priority of constituencies" (users > authors > spec writers > theory).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 17:19:13 UTC