- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 05:29:30 +0000 (UTC)
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