Re: [heycam/webidl] clearly state that declared interface members must be present on objects implementing the interface (#770)

In general, this is all enforced in browser development by the Web IDL code generators, which take in IDL files and spit out C++/Rust bindings code. So the only way a browser developer could have not included an interface member, is if they either did not include that part of the IDL in their `.idl` file, or if they were not using an IDL bindings generator at all.

In the former case, I would hope it's fairly clear to them that they are not implementing the spec as written, if they are using different IDL than the spec. In the latter case, I think they will have a lot of trouble implementing many different parts of any IDL-using spec.

I don't think it makes too much sense to add a note that is the moral equivalent of "please use the IDL in this spec as written, without deleting any lines". I'm curious how someone came to the conclusion that deleting lines of IDL was a reasonable way to implement the spec.

-- 
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/770#issuecomment-522737807