Should base64 advance alone or should it be part of a larger proposal? · Issue #7 · tc39/proposal-arraybuffer-base64 · GitHub
Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 28, 2025. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Oct 28, 2025. It is now read-only.

Should base64 advance alone or should it be part of a larger proposal? #7

Description

@domenic

Somewhat related to my worries in #6, I worry that working on a one-binary-encoding-per-proposal basis might have subpar ecosystem impacts. If base64 gets promoted to first-class language support, but base64url or hex require packages, that might not be the best outcome.

I understand from the discussions in #4 that the champions here don't like the API shape of https://github.com/lucacasonato/proposal-binary-encoding, but I think that proposal does a better job of putting multiple binary encodings on equal footing and ensuring they all get implemented together.

(It might also be worth doing some research on other binary encodings; base64, base64url, and hex are the ones I'm aware of from the research in https://github.com/lucacasonato/proposal-binary-encoding, but I guess the relevant RFC defines base32 as well, and I guess there are a lot of them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary-to-text_encoding )

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions