[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,

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