Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] WebXR Device API (#403)

Hi, @alice, @dbaron, @plins, and I talked about this a bit today at our Cupertino F2F.

@NellWaliczek wrote, in [a comment](https://github.com/immersive-web/webxr/pull/818#issuecomment-533766482) on webxr#818:

> * _What is the appropriate way to handle enum values that are required by a specification other than the one that originally defined the eum?_ We talked about a few different options but didn't come to a concrete conclusion.  After further discussion with the Gamepad API folks, I'm still not entirely sure what the right approach should be.  We've gotten several suggestions on how to go about this, but they all have different drawbacks and there doesn't appear to be consensus on the approach.  Given that this isn't a problem unique to WebXR, we'd really love to get a more definitive answer from the TAG about which approach is best for web platform consistency.
>   
>   1. When the secondary spec nears CR, move nearly all references to the enum and its purpose into the original spec
>   2. When the secondary spec nears CR, move the value to the original spec and point to the secondary spec for the explanation of it's purpose and use.
>   3. Investigate adding partial enums to webidl
>   4. Change the enum to be a DOM string

I think a variant of (ii) is best. The variation being that I don’t think “nearing CR” is the trigger, it’s “this is being implemented in a browser engine.” (This is essentially what @dbaron said in two comments on w3ctag/design-principles#99: ([1](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/99#issuecomment-494434323), [2](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/99#issuecomment-529793708)))

-- 
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/403#issuecomment-561412739