| 16:53 | <Richard Gibson> | yes, and it's in the former's style guide but with an exception ("function names, object keys, and string enumeration values below are all in camel case… For identifiers whose syntax comes from a different specification, follow the convention in that specification") and an observation that ECMA-262 Atomics.wait result objects have value "ok" or "not-equal" or "timed-out". For Temporal, it affects GetRoundingModeOption ("half{Ceil,Floor,Expand,Trunc,Even}") but surprisingly no other part that I can find. |
| 17:15 | <Richard Gibson> | but for the deeper topic, I think there's an issue with include both qualified and unqualified "export" fields, especially if the former is not a subset of the latter. I think it would be clearer to qualify both, e.g. imports vs. directExports vs. reexports |
| 17:51 | <kriskowal> | but for the deeper topic, I think there's an issue with include both qualified and unqualified "export" fields, especially if the former is not a subset of the latter. I think it would be clearer so qualify both, e.g. |
| 17:55 | <Richard Gibson> | if the fields include both exports and reexports, some people will expect that reexports is a subset of exports (i.e., «exports that have the "reexport" characteristic») and others will assume that their contents are disjoint. Either way, someone will be surprised (negative affect). |