Same here. Carpe diem. -- Yehuda Katz (ph) 718.877.1325 On Nov 2, 2012 7:24 PM, "Kevin Smith" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just speaking as a spec reader, I say go for it. > > - Kevin > > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> In both ES5 and ES6 (so far) we have generally tried to maintain the >> section structure of the previous editions. Occasionally we have had to do >> some minor subsection renumbering (or not so minor in the case of ES5 >> section 10) but have generally maintained the overall structure of the >> entire document, even when it has appeared to non-optimial or even >> confusing. >> >> I'm now looking at the work to implement the refactoring of the internal >> methods in section 8 and I see we are probably going to loose even more of >> the section number correspondence with previous editions. This tempts me >> to seize the moment, abandon the legacy organization, and reorganize in a >> more logical manner. >> >> Here is the new structure that I have in mind, with reference to existing >> ES5 (section numbers:) >> >> Introductory Material >> Scope (1) >> Conformance (2) >> Normative References (3) >> Overview (4) >> Notational Conventions(5) >> >> The ECMAScript Computational Engine >> Data Types and Values (8) >> Commonly used Abstract Operations (9) >> ECMAScript Execution (10 and possibly parts of 14) >> [Possibly new material related to module loaders and realms] >> >> The ECMAScript Programming Language >> Source Text (6) >> Conformance, Error Handling, and Extensions (16) >> Lexical Tokens (7) >> Expressions (11) >> Statements (12) >> Functions and Classes (13) >> Scripts and Modules (14) >> >> The ECMAScript Standard Library (15) >> [potentially some reordering and reorganization] >> >> Annexes >> >> >> What thoughts do people have about this? Should we go for an improved >> document organization or should be continue to patch around the current >> structure, probably forever. If we do restructure, I would probably do >> most of the work after we were feature complete and until them, only make >> incremental changes that make sense that the context of new feature work. >> But it would be helpful to decide soon which path we are going to take. >> >> One of the issue is the correspondence between the spec. organization and >> the test262 organization. We already have massive changes changes and the >> algorithm and algorithm set level that will impact test232, so I'm not sure >> that the higher level reorg that I'm thinking about would have that much >> more impact on it. >> >> Feedback??? >> >> Allen >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
