- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:15:06 +1100
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Cc: public-webapps@w3.org
Jonas Sicking: > Why do we need the FunctionOnly/PropertyOnly feature? In gecko we don't > have that functionality and it hasn't caused any problems that I can > think of. I took David’s feedback to mean that sometimes you want to state that a single-function interface can’t be implemented by a function (and added PropertyOnly for that). > What could make sense to do is to say that if the [Callback] interface > has any attributes or more than one function you can't pass a function. Attributes can’t be specified at all on callback interfaces to be implemented by a native object. > But why would we ever want an interface that only had one function that > we didn't want to be implementable as a function. Yes I think that is sensible, and I’d rather have it uniform like this. If nobody can point to any interfaces that should have non-uniform behaviour, I’ll happily take the arguments out. -- Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Monday, 24 November 2008 05:15:46 UTC