Re: Proposal: getElementsBySelector()

On 2007-02-06 14:58, Christophe Jolif wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> David Håsäther wrote:
>> On 2007-02-06 14:07, Christophe Jolif wrote:
>>
>>> Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>>> Not having heard strong objections, and having had support for 
>>>> getElementsBySelector() that is at least as strong as anything else, 
>>>> I think (with my chair's hat) this can be taken as the current 
>>>> resolution of the naming debate.
>>>>
>>>> Which would also resolve ISSUE-110.
>>>>
>>>> Any objections?
>>>
>>> +1
>>
>> Why? Because dojo has a method with a different name (not very similar 
>> in my opinion) that does something completely different?
> 
> 1/ My support to this decision is not linked to what I just discovered 
> in dojo (actually just while typing my email) but just the consequence 
> of the arguments I already stated several times on this same list. In 
> short: everyone is not as omniscient as the "web short naming gurus", 
> most people need descriptive names to do their every day job correctly 
> with the tons of API they have to cope in today programming word.

Sorry, I think I misunderstood you. I thought your "+1" was an 
objection, but I take it you meant that you support the 
"getElementsBySelector" proposal. If so, I agree with you :-)

-- 
David Håsäther