- From: Allen Wirfs-Brock <Allen.Wirfs-Brock@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:09:36 +0000
- To: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
+1 >-----Original Message----- >From: es-discuss-bounces@mozilla.org [mailto:es-discuss- >bounces@mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Brendan Eich >Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 9:56 AM >To: Anne van Kesteren >Cc: public-webapps@w3.org; HTML WG; es-discuss >Subject: Re: ECMA TC 39 / W3C HTML and WebApps WG coordination > >Three distinct topics are being mixed up here: > >1. Whether to use WebIDL or some unproposed alternative. > >2. Whether to use catchall patterns in new WebIDL-defined interfaces. > >3. Whether the JS WebIDL bindings should be standardized by Ecma or W3C. > >The straw man (0. Whether to remove catchall patterns from existing >WebIDL interfaces required for backward compatibility) is nonsense and >I'm going to ignore it from here on. > >My positions are: > >1. WebIDL, the bird in the hand (I agree with Sam: go invent something >better, come back when you're done). > >2. Don't keep perpetuating catchall patterns, they are confusing for >developers and costly for implementors and static analysis tools, even >if implementable in some future ES edition. > >3. Don't care. > >I differ from Mark on 3, but that's ok. What is not ok is to waste a >lot of time arguing from divergent premises that need to be unpacked >or else let alone for now, when we could be collaborating on concrete >issues such as split windows, execution model, catchall policing, etc. > >Mark's Joe with his JoeLang bindings for WebIDL vs. Anne's point about >the primacy of JavaScript bindings for WebIDL-defined interfaces is >not going to lead to rapid agreement on putting the ES WebIDL bindings >in Ecma vs. leaving them in W3C. It's a rathole, IMHO. > >Both points of view have merit, but precedent and possession matter >too, and Ecma can't plausibly fork or steal the binding spec. We're >trying to collaborate, so let's get on with that hard work instead of >trying to assail one another with principles that can't encompass the >whole picture. > >Hope this helps, > >/be >_______________________________________________ >es-discuss mailing list >es-discuss@mozilla.org >https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
Received on Friday, 25 September 2009 18:14:14 UTC