W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > June 2007

Re: [selectors-api] The Naming Debate

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 01:09:25 -0700
Message-Id: <E40DB09C-1333-4FC2-B9E0-A83CADE75C4E@apple.com>
Cc: Jean-Yves Bitterlich <Jean-Yves.Bitterlich@Sun.COM>, public-webapi <public-webapi@w3.org>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
To: Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>


On Jun 27, 2007, at 11:38 AM, Doug Schepers wrote:

>
> Hi, Jean-Yves-
>
> Jean-Yves Bitterlich wrote:
>> We find it unfortunate that past resolutions within the working  
>> group are being invalidated (unless of course there are new  
>> evidences/information that justify this act) in particular because  
>> this behavior leads to rehashing issues instead of moving forward.
>
> I could not agree more with this sentiment.  I know of no reason  
> this issue should have been reopened, since there was no new  
> evidence.  But ultimately, it is not that important, which makes it  
> all the more frustrating that it was reopened and effort was wasted.

The past resolution did not have consensus agreement from at least a  
couple of WG members who were not physically present at the meeting  
(for example I objected, on the basis that the new name is  
excessively long and does not allow for a reasonable single-result  
variant). We could say the people who had the time to be at the  
meeting should win, but maybe it's worth trying to find a broader  
consensus.

In addition, at least some of the proposed names in Lachlan's list  
were not considered at the WG meeting where the decision was made,  
according to the minutes. cssQuery was definitely not considered, for  
example. If we can find a new set of names that can achieve broader  
consensus

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 08:09:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:57 GMT