Re: Things missing from Web IDL for HTML5

Cameron McCormack:
> > Great!  I notice you haven’t used nullable types for any of the
> > DOMString arguments, attributes or return types.  Was that a conscious
> > choice?

Ian Hickson:
> It was intentional in that I'm intentionally sticking my head in the sand 
> about the whole DOMString/null/undefined issue at the moment, at least 
> until either you finish the tests you were writing, or I get off my lazy 
> behind and do it. :-)

OK, that’s fine.  I’ll definitely try to get back to that issue before
your planned October LC for HTML 5.

> BTW, is the following valid IDL? It seems to match the grammar, but I 
> can't work out what it means:
>    interface A {
>      void ();
>    };

That was intended to be invalid, but I missed out the requirement that
it have an identifier or special keywords on it.  Fixed now: (3rd para)

Cameron McCormack ≝

Received on Sunday, 16 August 2009 03:17:35 UTC