W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > December 2006

Re: Selectors API naming

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 13:04:25 +0100
Message-Id: <5BA6D7D2-764A-4370-A84B-F0BB6C5CD1A9@berjon.com>
Cc: "Web API public" <public-webapi@w3.org>, "Chris Wilson" <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Dave Massy" <dave.massy@microsoft.com>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>

On Dec 19, 2006, at 17:51, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
> 1. Does anyone see any other issue in the current draft that should  
> be fixed?
> 2. For the following options, do you consider the names "fine",  
> "not great but acceptable", or "unacceptable"?
>      getElementBySelector/getElementsBySelector
>      match/matchAll
>      matchSelector/matchAllSelectors

I find match and matchAll to be unacceptable. In terms of genericity,  
usefulness, and actual deployed usage CSS comes third behind regular  
expressions and XPath, both of which come to mind before CSS does.

Beyond that I don't have a strong opinion but I find matchSelector/ 
matchAllSelectors to be better due to being shorter (and not having a  
zillion casing toggles like the gEBS).

If you want a name that matches usage and the reality of what us  
developers will understand intuitively, I would recommend matchCSS.  
It's short, it's obvious, and it says exactly what it does.

-- 
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bender: Yeah! Well, I'm gonna go build my own theme park. With
   blackjack! And hookers! In fact, forget about the park!
                         -- Futurama
Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2006 13:10:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:56 GMT