[Bug 25495] Behavior of no [Exposed] on interface members is weird

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25495

Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ian@hixie.ch

--- Comment #6 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> ---
My preference for this would be that [Exposed] on an interface applies to the
interface, that everything on an interface that isn't annotated with its own
[Exposed] is always visible on that interface, and that the UA additionally
adds any "implements" and "partial" interfaces that are themselves Exposed
appropriately.

So:

  [Exposed=A,B]
  interface Foo {
    void f1();
  };
  Foo implements Bar;

  [Exposed=A]
  partial interface Foo {
    void F2();
  };

  [Exposed=B]
  partial interface Foo {
    void F3();
  };

  [Exposed=A]
  interface Bar {
    void f4();
  };

...would result in an interface Foo in contexts A and B but not C, and in A it
would have f1, f2, and f4, while in B it would have f2 and f3.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Monday, 28 July 2014 20:27:21 UTC