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

littledan commented on this pull request.



> +    module <mark>"std:example"</mark> {
+      /* module_members... */
+    };
+
+    partial module <mark>"std:example"</mark> {
+      /* module_members... */
+    };
+</pre>
+
+Note: As with partial interface definitions, partial module definitions are
+intended for use as a specification editorial aide, allowing the definition
+of a module to be separated over more than one section of the document, and
+sometimes multiple documents.
+
+The order that members appear in has significance for property enumeration in
+the <a href="#es-modules">ECMAScript binding</a>.

I was thinking of @tobie 's suggestion of lexicographic ordering in https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/432#issuecomment-334233518 . Looks like I mis-remembered it and he was actually suggesting sorting specifications by their "short name". However, @bzbarsky pointed out [issues](https://github.com/heycam/webidl/issues/432#issuecomment-334234875) with what "short name" means exactly.

Anyway, sorting *specifications* in some way doesn't seem so unidiomatic; what would be surprising is if all module members were sorted lexicographically, and the order within the specification weren't respected. But I guess no one is suggesting that.

-- 
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#discussion_r261990387