Intent to Ship: Add formatRange / formatRangeToParts to DateTimeFormat
Frank Tang
Intend to ship for Chrome m76
Title: Intent to Ship: Add formatRange / formatRangeToParts to DateTimeFormat
Contact emails
ft...@chromium.com, faba...@chromium.com
Explainer
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-DateTimeFormat-formatRange
https://rawgit.com/fabalbon/proposal-intl-DateTimeFormat-formatRange/master/out/ (notice the spec is already advanced into stage 3 in tc39 March 2019 meeting but the latest version has not bump the version from 2 to 3 yet)
Spec
https://rawgit.com/fabalbon/proposal-intl-DateTimeFormat-formatRange/master/out/
Design Doc https://goo.gl/PGUQ1d
Why the tag review process is being skipped: JavaScript features do not need to go through a TAG review, as they already get significant scrutiny as part of the TC39 staging process.
Summary
Add two new functions to Intl.DateTimeFormat.prototype - formateRange and formatRangeToParts to formate the range of two dates in a given locale.
Link to “Intent to Implement” blink-dev discussion
Is this feature supported on all six Blink platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux, Chrome OS, Android, and Android WebView)?
Yes
Demo link
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-intl-DateTimeFormat-formatRange
Debuggability
Nothing special.
Risks
Interoperability and Compatibility
This is a new API which agreed in TC39 meeting as a Stage 3 proposal. Engineer from Firefox team is supporting this proposal and the development is tracked in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1496584
Ergonomics
The performance of constructing the Intl.DateTimeFormat could be slower if we create the underline icu DateIntervalFormatter. To avoid such performance issue we identified, currently we plan to lazy initialize the required DateIntervalFormatter upon the first call to the formatRange or formateRangeToParts and cache the value afterward. This approach avoid such performance impact.
Activation
Web developers could use the API immediately upon our shipment, based on the usage of previous well supported Intl.DateTimeFormat object.
Is this feature fully tested by web-platform-tests? Link to test suite results from wpt.fyi.
Tests under tc39/test262 will includes many tests to test this API.
test/intl402/DateTimeFormat/prototype/formatRange and
test/intl402/DateTimeFormat/prototype/formatRangeToParts
Frank Tang
TAMURA, Kent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOcELL9mCNtM745fqWcVMwv1_JNZD0t7z%3DzDihbMiziOLHwOUw%40mail.gmail.com.
Software Engineer, Google
Daniel Bratell
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-dev+...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-dev/CAOcELL8YQJXzJ_g%2BFKskAsFmGjWExziQ0%2Btp1STn%2BQ9zMbabrw%40mail.gmail.com.
Yoav Weiss
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "blink-api-owners-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to blink-api-owners-d...@chromium.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msgid/blink-api-owners-discuss/op.z1uh85ybrbppqq%40cicero2.linkoping.osa.