Re: [heycam/webidl] Allow extended attributes to apply to types (#286)

> I guess I meant I didn't allow specifying annotations on individual types inside a union

Ah.  It seems like we do want to allow that.  On the other hand, specifying [Clamp] or [EnforceRange] or [TreatNullAs] on a union as a whole doesn't really make sense.  But in terms of grammar, I don't see a great way to disallow it (because the union could be hidden behind a typedef, say)...  We can just enforce it via the "can't be specified except on these types"  validation mechanism.

> This is the same issue as https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2017JanMar/0009.html, correct?

I'm not sure what you mean.  I mean, we do want to keep allowing extended attributes on attributes in general.  _And_ allow them on the type of the attribute.  That's not a problem because the two locations (start of attribute, start of attribute type) are not adjacent, so the grammar is unambiguous.  The only place where they _are_ adjacent are non-required dictionary members and non-optional operation arguments...



-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/heycam/webidl/pull/286#issuecomment-275310255