Re: [heycam/webidl] Merge ES binding section into type definitions (#15) from Anne van Kesteren on 2018-12-10 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from December 2018)

From: Anne van Kesteren <notifications@github.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 02:19:16 -0800
To: heycam/webidl <webidl@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <heycam/webidl/issues/15/445763367@github.com>

So what you're suggesting is that we have an independent definition of the type and then a description of how that type is mapped to JavaScript directly after it? I think that would be acceptable.

I think the idea we had much longer ago is that IDL would basically end up describing JS -> JS mapping, but everyone has probably moved away from that by now and understands why the conversion is appropriate and needed for certain things.

-- 
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/issues/15#issuecomment-445763367

Received on Monday, 10 December 2018 10:19:38 UTC