Re: [w3c/webcomponents] HTML modules spec draft editorial feedback (#783) from Domenic Denicola on 2019-02-15 (public-webapps-github@w3.org from February 2019)

From: Domenic Denicola <notifications@github.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2019 14:50:48 -0800
To: w3c/webcomponents <webcomponents@noreply.github.com>
Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
Message-ID: <w3c/webcomponents/issues/783/464234672@github.com>

Hmm, it's pretty clear to me that HTML Module Records belong in the HTML spec. TC39 would be very unlikely to accept them into their spec, and indeed has recently contemplated moving Source Text Module Records out of ecma262 and into HTML, where they'd be renamed "Web JavaScript Module Records". (Basically because they don't work very well for Node.js.) Similarly, for integration with WebAssembly, the WebAssembly Module Record is being defined in the WebAssembly spec.

Is there any counterargument for why this would belong in the base JS language 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/w3c/webcomponents/issues/783#issuecomment-464234672

Received on Friday, 15 February 2019 22:51:09 UTC