[whatwg] Avoiding new globals in HTML5 ECMAScript
Brett Zamir
brettz9 at yahoo.com
Sun May 9 22:34:29 PDT 2010
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
>
>
More information about the whatwg
mailing list