Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Define serialization and deserialization steps for DOMException #729

Closed
yutakahirano opened this issue May 27, 2019 · 6 comments · Fixed by #732
Closed

Define serialization and deserialization steps for DOMException #729

yutakahirano opened this issue May 27, 2019 · 6 comments · Fixed by #732

Comments

@yutakahirano
Copy link
Member

See whatwg/html#4268 for context.

cc: @domenic

@yutakahirano
Copy link
Member Author

@domenic, I filed this issue here because DOMException is defined here. Is here the right place to define the [de]serialization steps? I'm asking because "Serializable" extended attribute is defined in HTML.

@annevk
Copy link
Member

annevk commented May 27, 2019

Yeah, this would be the correct place.

@yutakahirano
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks!

@Ms2ger
Copy link
Member

Ms2ger commented May 27, 2019

I'm not sure I agree; it would add another dependency from IDL to HTML that I'd prefer to avoid. Alternatively, we could consider moving the whole section to IDL – based on a quick skip, it doesn't appear to depend on anything defined in HTML.

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented May 27, 2019

I don't think avoiding dependencies from IDL to HTML overall is worthwhile. There may be some sections where that could be valuable, e.g. the base binding layers that might be used by WebAssembly eventually, but having DOMException's serialization behavior depend on HTML seems fine. I also don't think that shuffling text between documents to preserve some notion of directional dependence is a good use of time.

@yutakahirano
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you. I created a minimal change (i.e., using HTML terms from WebIDL) as #732.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants