W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2015

RE: [WebIDL] T[] migration

From: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:36:34 +0000
To: Travis Leithead <travis.leithead@microsoft.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Message-ID: <CY1PR0501MB1369C3E520592F8F21AAC8B7DF990@CY1PR0501MB1369.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
So in terms of concrete updates, we'd need to fix

- https://html.spec.whatwg.org/

- https://w3c.github.io/webrtc-pc/

- http://dev.w3.org/csswg/cssom/ (sigh, still no https?)

The other documents mentioned are either obsolete or forks of (sections of) the first. Once the LS/EDs are fixed, then we can let The Process take over and worry about the copy-and-pasting/errata/etc., but getting the LS/EDs right is the important part for implementers.

Note that FrozenArray<T> is not a drop-in replacement for T[]. In particular, T[] is read-only by authors but mutable by UAs, whereas FrozenArray<T> is immutable. This might make things trickier.

---

From: Travis Leithead [mailto:travis.leithead@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 11:45
To: public-webapps; Ian Hickson
Subject: [WebIDL] T[] migration

Hey folks, 

Now that WebIDL has added FrozenArray<> and dropped T[], it’s time to switch over! On the other hand, there are a number of specs that have already gone to Rec that used the old syntax.

Recommendations:
• HTML5
• Web Messaging

Other references:
• CSS OM
• Web Sockets
• WebRTC

Legacy/Deprecated references:
• TypedArrays (replaced by ES2015)
• Web Intents

Thoughts on what to do about this? Should we consider keeping T[] in WebIDL, but having it map to FrozenArray<>? Should we issue errata to those Recs?
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2015 16:37:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:27:33 UTC