My apologies, it was brought to my attention that JSON was specified in
ECMAScript 5, but the principle still applies (for ECMAScript as well I
would say).
thank you,
Brett
On 5/10/2010 1:08 PM, Brett Zamir wrote:
Hello,
Although it seems a lot of attention has been given to ensuring
backward-compatibility in HTML5, and while a kind of namespacing has
been considered in use of data- attributes (over expando properties),
it appears to my limited observations that global (window) properties
are being added without sufficient regard for backward compatibility
(and in any case limiting future variable naming by authors).
While I can understand the convenience of properties like
window.localStorage or window.JSON, it seems to me that new global
properties and methods (at least future ones!) should be added within
some other reserved object container besides "window".
While I can appreciate that some would argue that the convenience of
globals to authors outweighs potential conflict concerns (and I know
I'm not offering this suggestion very early in the process), it seems
to me that HTML5's client-side ECMAScript should model good practices
in limiting itself as far as new globals perhaps similar to how XML
reserved identifiers beginning with "xml", doing the same with
allowing one "W3C" global or maybe "HTML{N}" globals or the like
("HTML" alone would no doubt be way too likely to conflict), allowing
authors the assurance that they can name their properties freely
within a given set of constraints without fear of being over-ridden
later.
thank you,
Brett
