Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Temporal proposal (#311)

Stream of consciousness before we take this up properly:

 * Is there a way to represent a time delta in this API?
 * What is the type relationship between `Instant` and [`DOMHighResTimeStamp`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DOMHighResTimeStamp)/[`DOMTimeStamp`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/DOMTimeStamp)? Do you envision those DOM types subclassing the new ones? Should they be convertable? Has there been a dicsussion about how IDL will translate them?
 * Has TC39 thought about [`HTMLTimeElement`](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/HTMLTimeElement/dateTime) integration? Or how this can work with [`<input type="time">`](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/input.html#time-state-(type=time))?
 * I don't think anyone is happy with the current [processing model in HTML](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/common-microsyntaxes.html#dates-and-times) which is Gregorian-only (uggh) and which seems to include custom parsers. We'd love your thoughts on how to join these up.
 * [`Instant`'s constructor appears to rely on BigInt](https://tc39.github.io/proposal-temporal/spec-rendered#sec-temporal-instant-constructor). Does DOM integration for `Instant` and related classes require WebIDL extensions?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/311#issuecomment-434623759