Re: [heycam/webidl] Define Web IDL Modules (#675)

A couple additional suggestions which @domenic and I recently discussed offline. I think any of these could be follow-ons and don't need to block the PR.

- This is a new feature that's not quite ready to use, given surrounding ongoing specification efforts. There should probably be a note to this effect, to avoid confusing people.

- Maybe we should use `export` rather than `readonly attribute` as the syntax?

- We could consider moving the synthetic module record definition into WebIDL, being explicit that it could move back into the ES spec at some point later if there is interest (in a note?). Editorially, we could also consider defining synthetic module records' contents during "create a synthetic module record", rather than during the evaluate phase steps (either way this goes, we could include a note explaining that there are multiple implementation options, both literally lazy-loading JS code and also setting them up more statically).

-- 
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/675#issuecomment-479913572