-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
Rationale for attaching to document? #23
Comments
Yeah, I'm not sure. I wasn't really around for the beginnings of the spec, but I do recall reading some discussion when starting up. Tracked it down to here: interledger/rfcs#500 (comment) |
And here: To quote @justmoon from comments above:
|
The decision about where to put this was not strongly sided either way. If it's better as a stand-alone global then let's make it a global. |
Yes, putting something in the global namespace would be my preference. |
@marcoscaceres |
Bit of both... we generally like to put things on the document that directly affect the Document. You can see what I mean by looking at the interface definition: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/#the-document-object In most cases, the methods and attributes affect the Document directly in some meaningful way. Monetization doesn't affect the Document or reflect some sate of the document, so should probably not be hung on that interface. |
Thanks again for the info :) |
Kamino closed and cloned this issue to interledger/webmonetization.org |
Wondering what the rationale was for attaching monetization to the
Document
object? It doesn't really feel like the right place to attach this, as monetization doesn't itself affect the document or have anything specifically to do with the document interface. We should consider maybe having monetization either on Navigator or its ownMonetization
namespace.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: