- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:58:48 +0100
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 22:46:44 +0100, Scott Hess <shess at google.com> wrote: > It seems to me that this is an area where if you give an inch, the > developer wants another inch. If you have something called "window", > then you're just moving things around - instead of saying "Where is my > window?", developers get to say "Why can't my window do X?" Since > this is all new ground, it might be more reasonable to define the set > of things you want to have in your worker context, and then contrive > to add those things to your UI context. That way you're explaining > what is there, rather than excusing what is not there. > > [Anvil labeled "Legacy Interfaces" lands on Scott's head.] Given that most people don't know the difference between the Window and the global object and the global worker object will already contain a bunch of APIs identical to those on the Window object it seems to me that giving the object and interface a different name doesn't really help. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 14:58:48 UTC