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

Re: [selectors-api] The Naming Debate

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:26:39 +0200
To: Martijn <martijn.martijn@gmail.com>, "Doug Schepers" <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
Cc: public-webapi <public-webapi@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.tumhqp01wxe0ny@pc052.coreteam.oslo.opera.com>

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 07:17:41 +0200, Martijn <martijn.martijn@gmail.com>  
wrote:

> 2007/6/28, Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>:
>> Decisions get made all the time without informing the public list.  The
>> decision to create this spec in the first place was not a public
>> decision.  Most of the wording and functionality of the spec was the
>> work of a small group of people.  Only when an issue is raised does the
>> debate start.
>
> Ok, thanks so that means it is normal to not inform people about
> decisions on the mailing list, right?

No - although it happens. In this case, I didn't notice that the relevant  
message went to the member-only list (it should normally have gone to the  
public list) so didn't ask for it to be forwarded. And Lachy was brand new  
in the group at the time (April).

> I'm still not really too fond with the way this was handled, but I was
> under the impression that this was something that was voted upon.

No. The working group doesn't generally work by vote. It aims to get  
consensus. Where there is a vote, it is a very fragile consensus, and  
people who weren't there to vote saying "hey, I have a real problem with  
this" can hold an issue open if they get some support.

> Sorry guys, I owe you, Lachlan and Charles (and probably more people)
> an apology...

Not to me - I really should have made sure it was clear this issue was  
open.

> Well, the only natural name for me is getElementsBySelector and from
> what I read on irc from Lachlan, that is not going to happen, so there
> is nothing for me to debate, is there?

If you really can't live with the names, and will ignore the spec and  
implement something else, then there is something to debate. I understand  
Jean-Yves' position and am extremely grateful to him and Sun for making  
this compromise. I think they are probably the ones with the strongest  
"substantial" case against it. Given that so many organisations have  
accepted the names proposed, I am hopeful that for the first time we can  
actually get a consensus. There are no good processes for resolving naming  
issues. Hence the call for consensus - if we can get it, then I am  
prepared to accept whatever names the consensus resolves on as being good  
enough.

I don't love the current names. There are real problems with  
getElementsBySelector, get, and the various other proposals too. Finding a  
perfect name is, in my opinion, not much more likely than serving roast  
unicorn when you come for dinner - certainly not enough more likely to  
justify the effort beyond an attempt to reach consensus on *something*...

So, sorry for the real communication failure, and I hope that you  
understand the process that got us here and can live with the names...

cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com    Catch up: Speed Dial   http://opera.com
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 08:26:57 GMT

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