Re: WebIDL

On Sep 26, 2009, at 08:43 , Yehuda Katz wrote:
> Do we disagree that it is a worthy goal to have a specification that
> can be understood without having to take a while? I certainly
> understand the utility in using something with precedent like IDL (for
> implementors).

It is a worthy goal, but it won't be possible to make it so that  
everyone finds it easy and quick to understand. The current syntax is  
not familiar only to implementers, whoever has looked at DOM, WebAPI,  
SVG, etc. specs for documentation over the past decade will find it  
very familiar. In fact, WebIDL was started in part to formalise the  
notation that was used colloquially in W3C specifications, sometimes  
in a way that was OMG IDL compliant, but other times in manners more  
creative than that.

Robin Berjon -

Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 08:51:11 UTC