I was at that presentation. It was effectively a debate between John Resig, who works for Mozilla, and Douglas Crockford, the "concerned" ECMA member mentioned. Bottom line is that Doug wants to have it both ways. He wants everyone to participate and discuss the language changes, but he rails on the majority of the committee for releasing information on what is going on internally. The release of the white paper was extremely helpful in getting the word out about the arcane internals of the working group. Had the paper not been released, his "go talk about the spec and raise your concerns" suggestion would not have been possible. /me shrugs -- Yehuda Katz <quote author="Scott Elcomb"> Hi all, First off, I'd like to say thanks for all the good questions and answers from folks on the list. I haven't been here long, but have already learned a bunch. Looking forward to ES4. Anyway, I received this post* this morning in response to a notice I sent along about the ES4 overview. I'm not sure what to make of the story... Any comments or clarifications? * http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.user-groups.linux.tolug/36420 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Walter Dnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Oct 27, 2007 3:44 AM Subject: Re: [TLUG]: ECMAScript ("Javascript") Version 4 - FALSE ALARM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 04:04:52PM -0400, Scott Elcomb wrote > An official overview[1] of "Javascript 2.0" was released today. > It will likely be some months (at least) for this version of the > language to show up in web browsers, but it might be a good idea to > get on-board early. Not so fast. See the note on Slashdot Firehose at http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=350409 Since it's not too long, I'll quote it in its entirety... > "At The Ajax Experience conference, it was announced that an > ECMAScript4 white paper had been released. The implication being > that the white paper was the upcoming spec, which is untrue. Not to > mention this is not an official ECMA site, but a site run by only > some of the members from the ECMAScript4 group. These facts were > later revealed by another concerned ECMAScript4 member. He encouraged > any interested parties to read the proposed feature white paper, join > the discussion mailing list on that site, and share your opinions > for (or against) the desired features. This seems a little `cloak > and dagger` of those running the site, who desire serious changes > and are unfortunately Mozilla, Adobe, and others. The concerned > individual suggested that they simply create a new language with a > new name, as there are that many fundamental differences. Many of > us are very concerned that the language we love is being rewritten > under our feet." -- Walter Dnes < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> In linux /sbin/init is Job #1 Q. Mr. Ghandi, what do you think of Microsoft security? A. I think it would be a good idea. -- The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://gtalug.org/ TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists -- Scott Elcomb http://www.psema4.com/_______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss</quote>
_______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
