-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Set IntlLegacyConstructedSymbol
to non-deprecated
#25749
Conversation
These features are specified as a "Normative Optional" but not "Normative Optional, Legacy" behavior. Given the distinction that the spec makes between legacy and non-legacy parts of the language, these features should not be marked as deprecated. Spec: https://tc39.es/ecma402/#sec-chaindatetimeformat Spec: https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-conformance Spec: https://tc39.es/ecma402/#sec-chainnumberformat
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense to me.
Do you think we should consult TC39 first? ECMA402 does not use the "legacy" verbiage at all at the moment, which suggests either it's not an editorial convention there yet (since it has no normative impact on conformance whatsoever), or they don't consider any part of ECMA402 as legacy. |
@Josh-Cena If you'd like to ask that'd be great, but I don't think we should wait on an answer. I did consider the idea that ECMA-402 did not take up the convention from ECMA-262. But since both specs point at each other for conformance, it's hard to read it in a way that allows one spec to make the distinction without the other doing the same. Additionally, some of the current specification text is less than a year old (tc39/ecma402@7018fba). I figured they knew what they were doing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should go ahead for now. Happy to change it if we hear otherwise from specification folks.
Summary
The spec doesn't appear to discourage these features.
Test results and supporting details
These features are specified as a "Normative Optional" but not "Normative Optional, Legacy" behavior. Given the distinction that the spec makes between legacy and non-legacy parts of the language, "Normative optional" should not be marked as deprecated.
Confusingly, the symbol's description contains the substring
Legacy
. This was a later addition to the spec that doesn't have much of a paper trail (and is older than the contemporary specification's "legacy" terminology—that is, it didn't have a defined meaning at the time). I think we should weigh the spec's explicit conformance text over a partial string match.Related issues
web-platform-dx/web-features#2564
#17410