Skip to content
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

Notebook Downloads (Standard Library Changes) #43

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 15, 2018
Merged

Conversation

jashkenas
Copy link
Contributor

  • Creates UMD and ES Module bundles of the standard library.

@jashkenas jashkenas requested a review from mbostock May 11, 2018 16:37
@jashkenas
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mbostock — if approved, I'd like to merge and publish this PR as version 1.0.0 on npm...

@mbostock
Copy link
Member

Per https://github.com/tc39/proposal-observable, Observable may be a thing in ECMAScript in the future, although it is just stage 1. I suppose we could use observablehq as the namespace?

@mbostock
Copy link
Member

My other concern #31 #32 is whether we should formally deprecate (though still support) the following methods:

  • Generators.filter
  • Generators.map
  • DOM.element
  • DOM.input
  • DOM.range
  • DOM.select
  • DOM.text

That said I’d probably not deprecate:

  • DOM.canvas
  • DOM.svg

I find myself still using DOM.svg a lot because it sets the viewBox automatically, likewise DOM.context2d is useful for its automatic high DPI support, and might as well keep DOM.canvas for symmetry with DOM.svg and for WebGL.

In practice this would mean moving the documentation for the deprecated methods from README.md to a DEPRECATED.md, and perhaps adding these to the deprecated list for autocomplete.

@jashkenas
Copy link
Contributor Author

CSS and UMD namespaces updated across the board to observablehq.

(Although, I still hold out hope that one day we'll be able to purchase observable.com)...

Just for expediency's sake: If we're not changing any of the functionality (yet), just the documentation, I don't think we need to make a decision on the deprecations before merging this branch and publishing a 1.0.0 — as long as the functionality remains in place, we can deprecate at any point afterwards.

@mbostock
Copy link
Member

Okay, that’s fair; we can punt on deprecation. 👍

@jashkenas
Copy link
Contributor Author

Alright, @tmcw — if you don't mind taking a look at this, I'd like to merge this, and publish stdlib 1.0.0 to npm ... once notebook-runtime PR has been merged as well.

@jashkenas jashkenas merged commit d55f764 into master May 15, 2018
@jashkenas jashkenas deleted the downloads branch May 15, 2018 18:03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants