On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
Looking at Section 3.4 of the CSP 1.1 draft [1], I'm noticing that the IDL
specified feels very, very strange to use from the JS perspective.
Thanks for taking a look! This is great feedback.
For instance, the name
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Mike West mk...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.com wrote:
readonly attribute DOMString[] reportURIs;
We decided at TPAC to remove the reportURIs getter unless someone has a
really good use-case for it.
If
Inline.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Mike West mk...@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Alex Russell slightly...@google.comwrote:
Looking at Section 3.4 of the CSP 1.1 draft [1], I'm noticing that the
IDL specified feels very, very strange to use from the JS perspective.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/11/2012 11:32, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On 11/4/12 3:58 PM, Alex Russell wrote:
DOMString toString();
This should probably be:
Le 05/11/2012 12:50, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com
mailto:bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/11/2012 11:32, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Boris Zbarsky bzbar...@mit.edu
mailto:bzbar...@mit.edu wrote:
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 12:14 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/11/2012 12:50, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/11/2012 11:32, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Boris Zbarsky
Le 05/11/2012 13:57, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 12:14 PM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com
mailto:bruan...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/11/2012 12:50, Alex Russell a écrit :
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM, David Bruant bruan...@gmail.com
mailto:bruan...@gmail.com
David Bruant wrote:
This M.O. is exacerbated by the reality that most of the folks
writing these specs are C++ hackers, not JS developers. For many,
WebIDL becomes a safety blanket that keeps them from having to ever
think about the operational JS semantics or be confronted with the
Hi all,
Looking at Section 3.4 of the CSP 1.1 draft [1], I'm noticing that the IDL
specified feels very, very strange to use from the JS perspective.
For instance, the name document.SecurityPolicy would indicate to a mere
JS hacker like me that the SecurityPolicy is a class from which instances
