Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Javascript > Augmenting ECMA-262 specs: crazy idea?

Reply
Thread Tools

Augmenting ECMA-262 specs: crazy idea?

 
 
optimistx
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2009
Regulars of this group have done valuable work to build FAQ.
FAQ is supposed to be correct and easy to understand material.
Is there anything, which is even more correct, more complete,
and easy to learn?

Many discussions here end up referring to ECMA-262, which
obviously should be the final truth (with errata-sheet included).

Why not add examples, clarifications, images, opinions, recommendations,
discussions directly to ECMA-262 and make it our Holy Bible
in practice, fun to study and discuss?

Copyright issues? No problem!

???

With bookmarklets (favelets). The user loads the html-version
of ECMA-262 to his/her machine, clicks a bookmarklet (one or
several) , which adds the
extra material from any servers as js-files to the user machine, merging
it to any locations in ECMA-262, in different colors, e.g. blue.

Copyright is respected, because the final user in his/her computer
makes the modificitions, nobody else.

The process could be started immediately by any person or group,
and proceed step by step. An example could be made first to play
with the idea.

Thus the user manual would emerge gradually and naturally.

Your opinion?
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Dmitry A. Soshnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-06-2009
On Nov 6, 12:08*pm, "optimistx" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> [...]
> Why not add examples, clarifications, images, opinions, recommendations,
> discussions directly to ECMA-262
> [...]


Because it's a technical algorithm descriptions but not the practical
hand/cook book with funny pictures and easy (but not correct)
terminology which we can see in many articles.

I wrote 7 deep articles of ECMA-262-3 details <http://javascript.ru/
ecmascript-in-detail>, but for now they are just in Russian. I'll find
the time and will translate them. There will be something you want to
do with ECMA-262 standard - simplified but accurate and correct
explanations of algorithms and so one.

But if you're talking just about marginal notes made right in ECMA-262
standard - that's a good idea and everyone can do it himself.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
optimistx
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2009
Dmitry A. Soshnikov wrote:

> Because it's a technical algorithm descriptions but not the practical
> hand/cook book with funny pictures and easy (but not correct)
> terminology which we can see in many articles.
>
> I wrote 7 deep articles of ECMA-262-3 details <http://javascript.ru/
> ecmascript-in-detail>, but for now they are just in Russian. I'll find
> the time and will translate them. There will be something you want to
> do with ECMA-262 standard - simplified but accurate and correct
> explanations of algorithms and so one.
>
> But if you're talking just about marginal notes made right in ECMA-262
> standard - that's a good idea and everyone can do it himself.


Your kind tone makes me happy, thanks.

The first time you mentioned your articles I let google translate them for
me. I understood quite a lot, but not everything. If I understood
Russian, I woul like to translate them.

Yes, marginal notes can be written by oneself, but how to share them
with others? E.g. php-manual (for php-language) has reader comments,
which I many times have found more interesting than the actual manual
text; but both are useful.

I proposed to start from ECMA-262 because here some knowledgeable
purists do not respect anything
else, even Flanagan's book is rubbish or unreliable or something.

But maybe that most regulars know so much about javascript that
these are not interesting for them.

phph-manual: http://www.php.net/manual/en/

bookmarklets in practice:
http://instacalc.com
http://betterexplained.com/articles/...b-application/

 
Reply With Quote
 
optimistx
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2009
Jake Jarvis wrote:
>
> So what's your current status on that "annotation project"?


It has not been started . Perhaps other similar or better projects for
ECMAScript learning exist already (?).

 
Reply With Quote
 
VK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2009
On Nov 7, 3:20*pm, "optimistx" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Jake Jarvis wrote:
>
> > So what's your current status on that "annotation project"?

>
> It has not been started . Perhaps other similar or better projects for
> ECMAScript learning exist already (?).


I'd really like to see ECMA Books translated in Latin one day - that
would be a psychedelic reading stuff I would pay to have
 
Reply With Quote
 
VK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-07-2009
On Nov 7, 6:18*pm, Jake Jarvis <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> VK wrote:
> > On Nov 7, 3:20 pm, "optimistx" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> Jake Jarvis wrote:

>
> >>> So what's your current status on that "annotation project"?
> >> It has not been started . Perhaps other similar or better projects for
> >> ECMAScript learning exist already (?).

>
> > I'd really like to see ECMA Books translated in Latin one day - that
> > would be a psychedelic reading stuff I would pay to have

>
> For your strictly decorative bookshelf which already houses the original
> specification?


Oh yes, together with my special English edition bound in human flesh
and inked in blood
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dr J R Stockton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-08-2009
In comp.lang.javascript message <4af52a7d$0$6298$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:06:23, optimistx <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>
>I proposed to start from ECMA-262 because here some knowledgeable
>purists do not respect anything
>else, even Flanagan's book is rubbish or unreliable or something.


You need to say whether you intend to use ECMA 263 3rd Edition and which
errata, in which case you should equally be using ISO/IEC 16262, since
16262 is a more recent version with some of the errors removed; or
whether you will be using 5th Edition, in which case (AFAIK) you can
only make draft comments, since (AFAIK) 5th Edition has not yet received
the final and indispensable accolade of being formally issued.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-09-2009
kangax wrote:

> VK wrote:
>> "optimistx" wrote:
>>> Jake Jarvis wrote:
>>>> So what's your current status on that "annotation project"?
>>> It has not been started . Perhaps other similar or better projects for
>>> ECMAScript learning exist already (?).

>>
>> I'd really like to see ECMA Books translated in Latin one day - that
>> would be a psychedelic reading stuff I would pay to have

>
> Why latin? They are already translated to Russian by Soshnikov, which
> you can read easily.


There are no "ECMA Books" or "Book(s) of ECMA". Please do not follow up on
that newest religious fantasy of the person calling themselves "VK" here.

Instead, there are several technical Specifications published by Ecma
International (formerly ECMA), the one (or two) relevant here being numbered
ECMA-262 (and titled "ECMAScript Language Specification" -- of which there
are three published Editions so far, the third being the most relevant
today) and ECMA-357 (titled "ECMAScript for XML").

> Why not start with that?


Because they already admitted they "don't give a damn" what "ECMA" has to
say?


PointedEars
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dmitry A. Soshnikov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-09-2009
On Nov 9, 8:52*pm, kangax <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> [...]
> They are already translated to Russian by Soshnikov
> [...]


No, kangax, I write my author's articles about ECMA-262-3 features,
explaining this stuff to every interested in ES deeply.

But if meant translation of exactly ECMA-262-3 specification - we also
have the Russion translation - <http://javascript.ru/ecma> - that's
official translation coordinated and agreed with ECMA, but it was
translated not by me (though, was review by me also).

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Augmenting Types Ryan Chan Javascript 113 01-09-2010 10:38 AM
Augmenting functions disappearedng Javascript 6 11-14-2008 08:47 PM
crazy browser go crazy dr greg Computer Support 7 01-14-2005 09:13 PM
Java equivalent of MI for augmenting base of a hierarchy David Bolen Java 4 08-27-2003 11:59 PM



Advertisments