On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Paul Rouget <p...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On 2015-09-15 7:31 AM, Paul Rouget wrote: >>> >>> I believe the WebIDL files should play this role. But they are missing >>> comments and events. >> >> >> WebIDL files are not a suitable place for documentation to live, since they >> require review from DOM peers who are typically overloaded individuals, and >> it would be nice to not make them review documentation changes. >> >> I don't understand why the dev-doc-needed based workflow that we use to >> document other parts of the Web platform is insufficient for this API. > > Other parts of the web platforms usually have a reference: the > specification. So there’s a minimal documentation already available. > Which is not the case with the API with no standardization efforts, > like the Browser API. > > And we can’t use dev-doc-needed to keep a reference up to date (too > often, we forget about the flag, and like Chris said, the MDN editors > are very busy too), and that’s clearly the responsibility of the > developer, not of the MDN team. > >
I agree with Paul. We should try to expose the event properties and stuff with defined WebIDL interface instead of Cu.cloneInto(). FWIW, I am trying to do that in bug 1197700 etc. for mozInputMethod API. However, just like everything related to B2G, I am not sure about the priorities on this. (CC'ing Kanru -- we actually talked about this a few weeks ago offline) Tim _______________________________________________ dev-b2g mailing list dev-b2g@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
