2008/8/19 Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Aug 19, 2008, at 7:48 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote: >> As we discussed in Oslo, I expect there will need to be a significant >> version between ES3.1 and ES-Harmony. > > It's not clear what ES-Harmony is, but the main idea is a major successor > using a > better specification technique, with new syntax where appropriate, and some > new > semantics if we agree (new Name, e.g.). > We did not lay out a roadmap including two successors, for sure. That is, we > did > not agree to do a 3.2. So I think it's premature to assign any 3.x version > right now. > The work is the thing, not the staging into manageable specs.
I agree, and I had not meant to imply otherwise. My text above was precise but confusing: "As we discussed ... I expect ...". Thanks for the clarification. When I try to imagine the process, personally, I do expect that there will need to be a stage between the two -- in order to decouple the substantial changes to the spec formalism from the substantial differences between ES3.1 and ES-Harmony. But as you say, there was no general agreement or disagreement on what the staging should be between ES3.1 and ES-Harmony. Nor does there need to be at this point. > Thanks for the pointers to proxy and membrane work. Many implementations > have wrappers of various kinds already. Then there was the ES4 catchalls > proposal, which if you ignore namespaces can be used as an informative > source along with the other precedents. Agreed. -- Cheers, --MarkM _______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
