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

Re: ACTION-87: Selectors API

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 15:24:37 -0700
Message-ID: <447CC625.20302@sicking.cc>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>, "Web APIs WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 15:35:24 +0200, Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com> wrote:
>>> The shortest name should represent the most efficient method imho.
>> Crazy notion, names should be clear, not short for efficiency.
> The point was that if the more efficient one of the  two actually had a 
> longer name, people would probably use the shorter name and just take 
> the first node using [0] or whatever can be used for that in their 
> language binding.

I agree that is a risk, though not really a huge concern. Convenience 
methods are often slower than more complex syntax. Once a script gets so 
slow that performance matters (which often never is the case when it 
comes to web scripts) then they could switch to the more optimized methods.

All we'd need to do for this to work is to describe in the spec which 
method is likely to be faster.

/ Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2006 22:24:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:21 UTC