What was Harmonious prospectively can still be Harmonious in ES6 (as in
ES5, remember, Harmony started in July 2008). The wiki harmony:
namespace remains.
I agree with the idea already in practice that Rick cited. Big note/link
at top, leave the harmony: proposal as it was for historical purposes.
We can certainly clean out the harmony: namespace of ES6 proposals, but
more when ES6 is "done" -- IMHO. Thoughts?
/be
Brandon Benvie wrote:
My understanding is that "harmony" refers perpetually to ES-next,
whatever that thing is at the time. Since ES6 now has a name and a
(draft) spec, it no longer is harmony (it's ES6). The wiki doesn't
reflect this, but this is what (I think) I have observed from what
TC39 members have said.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Domenic Denicola
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think part of the confusion is that, from what I understand,
"harmony" refers to things that are agreed upon by all TC39
members, or at least were at one time. But this does /not/ imply
it being in ES6.
That is, much confusion I've seen on the internet stems from
people assuming "harmony" means ES6, since for so long we were
calling it "ECMAScript Harmony."
I'd suggest either downgrading non-ES6 proposals to strawman, or
creating a new "es6" namespace and moving the relevant pages
there. The former is probably very appropriate for things that
were once harmonious, but now contentious or obsoleted by other
features.
--
Of course, the actual solution for all this is for me to launch a
bunch of pull requests against Dave's new wiki, giving it the same
breadth and depth as the current one. Then we can point the
internet to that as the authoritative source of information, with
the current wiki used more as a scratchpad or historical archive.
I'll try to re-shuffle my to-do list...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
[[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>] on behalf of Rick Waldron
[[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>]
*Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2013 13:20
*To:* David Bruant
*Cc:* Brendan Eich; es-discuss Steen
*Subject:* Re: Wiki and drafts (was: Polyfill for Maps and Sets)
Cool, check this:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-January/028270.html
:)
That's not all of them, but I'll go through it all again for
anything I missed (unless you want to list any here, which would
be fantastic)
Rick
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:08 PM, David Bruant <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Le 18/01/2013 18:58, Rick Waldron a écrit :
It doesn't seem reasonable to maintain two versions of the
proposals as they become specifications.
My first thought is that the simplest possible strategy is
to update harmony proposal pages (on the wiki) with a line
at the top that indicates that the proposal is now in the
spec draft. This is low effort-cost to convey that
everyone should be looking at the latest and greatest of
each proposal as they become part of the ES6 draft
revisions and progress towards finalization therein.
I fully agree. It'll bring more attention to what happens in
the drafts and will make more people to review them.
Also, if something in the harmony namespace is put on hold
like harmony:classes it should probably be downgraded to the
strawman namespace.
David
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
