The group voted unanimously in favor of the standard to be ratified.
Standard is now DIS-16262.
July 13th 9:00 PDT Telephone meeting.
September 15th/16th @ NSCP from 10:00 'til 5:00 for next face to face.
Andrew Clinick will send round details for newsgroup and investigate getting a mail reflector for the newsgroup.
Reply to Martin Duerst
Drafted by Clayton. The references to URL's have been removed from the V1 standard.
There is some question over RFC 1738 but this will be resolved via email.
Rok will talk to Norris to ensure that MSFT's and NSCP's browser implementations conform and to see if there are any further anomalies.
The group will ask if he wants to be on the reflector.
Clayton will rephrase the reply from the committee and ask if wants to be on the reflector and inform him of the next meeting date in September.
Thanks to Karl for putting together the disposition of comments and Bill for editing the document.
Propose that all Version 1 changes get merged into the current Version 2 document.
The corrections for ISO will be referred to as the second edition of ECMA 262 not the second version.
Andrew Clinick will invite XSL and SPICE representatives to a technical meeting on September 16th to discuss their requirements/needs of the language in the future. Copy in Martin Duerst.
Everyone seems to be in agreement on the current proposal but the existing document does not conform to the new thinking. Waldemar will be rewriting the document and provide a draft prior to the September 15th meeting.
I18N Unicode Issues
Tom McFarlands comments on I18N will discussed in the afternoon session.
Section 16 Errors
The existing section is fine for Version 1 but exception handling will require some major changes to this.
188.8.131.52 Max and 184.108.40.206 Min
Content agreed but what about when no argument is passed in then it would be positive or negative infinity.
Changes in this section should be backed out to reflect V1 of the spec.
Get the length once and return undefined if it changes. We will have a general discussion on persistence and then revisit toSource when we have made a decision of what to do.
Differences in implementation (NSCP use real arrays MSFT use sparse arrays) resulted in the rules in step 7 allowing for implementation dependent mechanism for dealing with arrays.
The 'this' argument is treated differently than the array arguments themselves. It is proposed that it should be handled the same as arguments. Mike (NSCP) will provide a write up on this and the key issues with array.
Returns undefined. Functionally correct.
Waldemar will look into this and write up his proposals to the group.
Naming came from PERL implementation and is shipping with Navigator. Rok Yu suggested an argument to the implementation and will provide a specification for it.
Naming came from PERL implementation and is shipping with Navigator.
The group decided that further discussion was required on this subject since it affects so many methods in the language. A document discussing extensions to array is required. It will be delivered before the meeting where this will be discussed.
Slice needs review, NSCP to provide this.
Not ready. Needs considerable review from the group. Bill Gibbons will own this.
Group agreed in principle to the proposal. Step 6 has a typo.
String.prototype.substring and String.prototype.substr
NSCP to provide a proposal about which ones to keep in the specification.
Keywords and Reserved words
Should be in ISO approved version 1.
8.6.2 Internal Properties/Methods
Requires separate discussion other than HasInstance.
11.8 Relational operators
Can go in the draft document as functional complete.
The differences between left hand side and the right hand side. The right hand side is very strict yet the left-hand side is much more forgiving. This is inconsistent.
Step 8 has to change from return result 6 to return result 7.
11.8.7 in operator
The proposal is functionally correct. There were some concerns raised over whether in should be an operator or a function.
Discussion over naming hasImmediateProperty was proposed. Step 3 required some more work. There are no real precedents from prototype based languages. Rok Yu will look into the name.
Renamed to isPrototypeOf.
Agreed to functionally accept. Language will be cleaned up by NSCP.
7.7 Why did XXXX get moved
Bill Gibbons explained that it had to be moved for compliance.
8.9 Completion Type
Covered by exception handling.
11.1 Primary Expressions
Leave this open for sharp variable discussion.
11.1.4 Array initializer
Leave this open for sharp variable discussion.
13 Function definition
Leave for Stack frame discussion.
Change to content agreed dependent on the exception handling proposals.
220.127.116.11 Eval (x)
Changed for V1 already so just needs to revert to V1.
18.104.22.168 Really Regular Expressions
Leave for RegExp discussion.
15.2.4 Properties of the Global Object
Leave for toSource discussion.
15.3.4 Properties of the Function Prototype Object
Converted to a C.
15.3.5 Properties of Function Instances
Arguments deleted in V1.
ReadOnly doesn't make sense – so ReadOnly should be deleted.
15.4 Call Objects
Defer to Stack frames discussion.
Version 1 (ISO revision) has the correct changes so when this is merged into the V2 doc then it will be correct.
Other than the sharp variables reference this is OK.
Wanted a keyword but perhaps it could be added as an undeletable property to the global object. Herman will write up a proposal for this.
MSFT will write up the current JScript implementation for Error object.
Agenda for Next meeting
Sparse Arrays [WH]
Array like [WH]
Array & Push[RY]
Try Catch [WH]
"Stack Frames" [CL]
W3C (Spice/XSL) [AC] – a.m.
I18N [MK] – p.m.
Regular Expression [AC]