Hi Maciej, I see. Taking the multi-language requirement, I think we mean an interface that is sandboxed within some VM, be it Java, JS or whatever else and that is not exposed outside of the VM apart from being a parameter or result of the operation. [ClientXXX] naming could result in associations with client-server architecture and it seems not to be our case?
What then about [InternalInterface]? Thanks. Kind regards, Marcin Marcin Hanclik ACCESS Systems Germany GmbH Tel: +49-208-8290-6452 | Fax: +49-208-8290-6465 Mobile: +49-163-8290-646 E-Mail: marcin.hanc...@access-company.com -----Original Message----- From: public-webapps-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-webapps-requ...@w3.org] On Behalf Of Maciej Stachowiak Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 9:15 AM To: Marcin Hanclik Cc: Cameron McCormack; Giovanni Campagna; Kruessel, Steffen; WebApps WG; i...@hixie.ch Subject: Re: [WebIDL] Callback, PropertyOnly, NoInterfaceObject On Jun 30, 2009, at 11:29 PM, Marcin Hanclik wrote: > What about [ESNativeObject]? I don't think the property should be ES-specific. It would probably have effects for other language bindings too. I'm also not sure this clarifies the use of Native. Regards, Maciej ________________________________________ Access Systems Germany GmbH Essener Strasse 5 | D-46047 Oberhausen HRB 13548 Amtsgericht Duisburg Geschaeftsfuehrer: Michel Piquemal, Tomonori Watanabe, Yusuke Kanda www.access-company.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments hereto may contain information that is privileged or confidential, and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. Any disclosure, copying or distribution of the information by anyone else is strictly prohibited. If you have received this document in error, please notify us promptly by responding to this e-mail. Thank you.
