- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 06:25:59 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: Web Applications Working Group WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010, Jonas Sicking wrote: > > > > It doesn't, hence why I think we should be consistent and call them > > all "URL". My point is that while I can understand that we can't > > change Document.URL, if we decide that consistency with something else > > is more important for one API, e.g. "File.url", then we really have no > > excuse for being inconsistent with new APIs as well. > > Again, I think this is a very weird definition of "consistent". I think > it's more consistent to follow the hundreds of other properties which > use camelCase, than the one that is upper case. Despite the fact that > the one uppercase one has the same name. So you're arguing that it should be .uRL? That's what camelCase would give us here. It's closer to .URL than .url, though. > So I think we should go with what's most memorable and most > consistent, which I argue is using lower case. I agree except for I would concluded that that is uppercase in this case. Acronyms in the platform are more often uppercase than lowercase (e.g. .innerHTML, .outerHTML, .responseXML, .URL, etc). -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 2 May 2010 06:26:29 UTC