W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Rename XBL2 to something without X, B, or L?

From: Dirk Pranke <dpranke@chromium.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:25:45 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTinP62nM7d-eWe0PHPG37k3RVv_RLo2swULR0G5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
I like Web Components.

-- Dirk

On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com> wrote:
> How 'bouts a shorter version of Tab's suggestion: "Web Components" ?
>
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:51:39 +0100, Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Dec 14, 2010, at 22:24 , Dimitri Glazkov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is
>>>> trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into
>>>> something that is less legacy-bound?
>>>
>>> I strongly object. We have a long and proud tradition of perfectly
>>> horrible and meaningless names such as XMLHttpRequest. I don't see why we'd
>>> ever have to change.
>>>
>>> Shadow HTML Anonymous DOm for the Web!
>>
>> Cause I know you are being serious I will be serious as well and point out
>> that XMLHttpRequest's name is legacy bound as that is what implementations
>> call it and applications are using. XBL2 has none of that.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Anne van Kesteren
>> http://annevankesteren.nl/
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 22 December 2010 00:26:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:42 GMT