| 13:46 | <manu> | annevk Domenic: We're using INFRA in new W3C specs... it doesn't look like "number" is a primitive type (which has led to some debate in our WG)... what's the guidance there? Is there a primitive number type and I'm missing it? Would either of you be open to adding this type via PR (or at least a section on why there isn't a number primitive type)? |
| 13:48 | <manu> | annevk: ... and different question about WHATWG URL spec: Some of us are trying to get another W3C WG to use the WHATWG URL spec... Is the guidance to still move from URI/IRI to URL everywhere? Are there any corner cases where one should use URI/IRI instead of URL. |
| 13:48 | <manu> | Note that both use cases above are for non-browser environments, if that changes the guidance at all. |
| 13:49 | <manu> | Also interested in hearing from anyone else in this channel that has operational knowledge wrt. these two specs ^ |
| 13:52 | <Ms2ger> | I guess the concept of a number could be clarified some more, yeah. (TC39 still has some issues with that as well - distinguishing between JS Number / BigInt / "mathematical values") |
| 13:53 | <Ms2ger> | As far as I'm aware, the recommendation here would still be to rely on the WHATWG URL spec for everything URL-like |
| 13:54 | <andreubotella> | From what I can see in the older issues in the repo, the plan was to decide on something once BigInt was stabilized. Guess they never got around to it. |
| 14:05 | <Ms2ger> | There's some wip at https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/pull/2007 |
| 14:05 | <andreubotella> | I mean Infra, not TC39 |
| 14:19 | <Domenic> | manu: the tracking issue for adding numbers is https://github.com/whatwg/infra/issues/87. In the meantime, I'd say it's OK to not have literally everything be grounded in Infra types; you can say "number" without linking to anything (if it's obvious), or referring to something different like IEEE 754 if you have specific requirements (see e.g. https://streams.spec.whatwg.org/#conventions) |
| 14:20 | <Domenic> | Agree on URL everywhere |
| 14:45 | <manu> | Domenic: re: infra -- great, thanks for the link, left a comment about helping w/ a PR here -- https://github.com/whatwg/infra/issues/87#issuecomment-665083270 |
| 14:46 | <manu> | Domenic: re: "ok to not have everything grounded" -- we're dealing w/ a pedantic W3C WG... we grounded everything else in Infra except for number, so naturally people are asking why we can't ground number now. :) -- I'm happy to write a PR if we can get /something/ into Infra for number. |
| 14:46 | <manu> | Domenic: re: URL -- k thx. |
| 14:54 | <andreubotella> | heh, that "excruciating detail" about UTF-16 is very much needed for interaction with JS |
| 14:54 | <andreubotella> | it's the kind of thing we wouldn't do if we were designing the web platform from scratch |
| 14:55 | manu | agreed andreubotella -- wasn't saying it wasn't necessary. |
| 22:59 | <TabAtkins> | tbf, JS has had to well-ground their Number references, to make it clear in each case whether they're referring to IEEE doubles or mathematical reals. |