On May 28, 2011, at 11:32 AM, Peter Michaux wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Waldemar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Versioning: >> <script type="application/ecmascript;version=6"> (RFC 4329) >> use version 6; >> module LOL { >> ... >> } >> </script> >> There are good reasons to have the metadata both externally (in the script >> tag) and internally (in the script). External versioning allows >> implementations to avoid fetching a script at all if they won't understand >> it. Internal versioning helps in the case where the external version is >> detached. >> >> Brendan's idea: >> <script-if type=...> >> ... >> <script-elif type=...> >> ... >> <script-else> >> ... >> </script>
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg05005.html had the example I was trying to reconstruct from memory at last week's meeting: <script-if type="application/ecmascript;version=6"> // new.js inline-exanded here </script-if else> <script ...> </script> </script-if end> >> Consensus on moving some form of versioning into Harmony. The strawman is a >> bit light at this time, so no specifics yet. > > A lot of the above looks like HTML. Isn't versioning that depends on > HTML out of scope for the ECMAScript standard? Yes, so? Call the jusdiction police :-P. We were talking about a "systems" problem, which requires looking across layers and considering the big picture. At the meeting, Mark Miller suggested we take the idea of <script-if> to the public-script-coord mailing list. I'll do that next week. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
