In the Web IDL spec, there is no type named 'DOMObject'. It should be 'any'. We should replace all 'DOMObject's in WebKit IDLs with 'any's.
Created attachment 188283 [details] Patch
When it was DOMObject it sounded like "this needs to be some kind of object". Now "any" sounds like "hey this could be anything. A number. An object. A string. Anything!". To me this hurts clarity / readability. Unless "any" really does mean any type, including primitives like numbers?
(In reply to comment #2) > When it was DOMObject it sounded like "this needs to be some kind of object". > Now "any" sounds like "hey this could be anything. A number. An object. A string. Anything!". The Web IDL spec says that we should call it "any": http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/#idl-types > Unless "any" really does mean any type, including primitives like numbers? "any" does mean any type. Internally it is implemented as a ScriptValue, which can store any JavaScript value. In the WebKit IDL files, "any" and "DOMObject" have been used interchangeably. Given that it can handle any type, "any" would be a better name than "DOMObject".
@joepeck: Our trajectory here is to to match WebIDL. If you have comments about the readability of WebIDL, you might want to bring that up with the WebApps working group.
Comment on attachment 188283 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 188283 Committed r142935: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/142935>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.