W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2006

[whatwg] JSON encoding

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 05:29:30 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0611060528210.18838@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>
On Sat, 4 Nov 2006, Alfonso Baqueiro wrote:
> > 
> > Assuming the thread is about introducing a way to convert a JS object 
> > into a JSON representation, then I would encourage you to contact the 
> > ECMAScript committee. Adding features to JavaScript is out of scope 
> > for the WHATWG specs.
> 
> Well, I think adding features to javascript is part of its own nature, 
> we can add features using the prototype without consulting any comitee, 
> thats powerfull and also could be a source imcopatibility between 
> libraries, consider the prototype.js library, it really extend the 
> language.

Sure. My point is that if we _are_ going to have a commitee be consulted 
on this, it should be the ECMAScript one, and not the WHATWG one.


On Sun, 5 Nov 2006, Paul Arzul wrote:
> 
> this is getting a bit off topic, but it looks like he already has:
> 
> "It is expected that these methods will formally become part of the 
> JavaScript Programming Language in the Fourth Edition of the ECMAScript 
> standard in 2007." <http://www.json.org/json.js>
> 
> and it's in the draft spec: 
> <http://developer.mozilla.org/es4/spec/chapter_19_native_objects.html>

Cool. Definitely not a WHATWG issue then. :-)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 5 November 2006 21:29:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:49 UTC