- From: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>
- Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 15:37:40 -0400
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: > Does the TAG want to take up this issue, to look at WebIDL? I don't know about the TAG, but it seems pretty clear that getting proper coordination on the global object is quite important for the [architecture of the] Web, and if Doug is bringing this to your attention, then there must be some pretty serious dysfunction. But it's odd that there isn't adequate coordination already, given that any decision by either group is intended to affect all the same implementation efforts. Quoth http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/TC39-M.htm : "The ECMAScript™ specification has been developed by Ecma TC39 whose membership includes all major browser vendors." I see that something like this has come up before: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2009-September/009844.html (and preceding and following messages in thread) Also I thought we had an informal email list devoted to coordination: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/ Obviously the built-in Javascript namespaces (especially methods on the global object) ought to be among the use cases in our various 'namespaces and registries' discussions. I believe there *are* formal liaisons on both sides. According to http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison, W3C's liaison to Ecma is Daniel Dardailler. Jonathan > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: talking about WebIDL > From: Douglas Crockford <douglas@crockford.com> > To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> > CC: > > Web IDL is putting material on window.prototype. This is causing > problems for TC39 which is trying to manage the evolution of window, > which very unfortunately is also ECMAScript's global object, the most > problematic feature of the language as well as the enabling technology > for XSS attacks. > > This is one of those jagged edges I was talking about. There should be a > formal liason between W3C and TC39 to try to better manage this crap.
Received on Friday, 21 September 2012 19:38:08 UTC