W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: [webcomponents]: Naming the Baby

From: Ryan Seddon <seddon.ryan@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 10:08:48 +1100
Message-ID: <CADsa-VegjKzygriAtp4p+XpJi+oGjou5iwduNFD48EY5HM4jWg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
I like the idea of "package" seems all encompassing which captures the
requirements nicely. That or perhaps "resource", but then resource seems
singular.

Or perhaps "component-package" so it is obvious that it's tied to web
components?

-Ryan


On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:03 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>wrote:

> Hello folks!
>
> It seems that we've had a bit of informal feedback on the "Web
> Components" as the name for the <link rel=component> spec (cc'd some
> of the "feedbackers").
>
> So... these malcontents are suggesting that "Web Components" is more a
> of a general name for all the cool things we're inventing, and <link
> rel=component> should be called something more specific, having to do
> with enabling modularity and facilitating component dependency
> management that it actually does.
>
> I recognize the problem, but I don't have a good name. And I want to
> keep moving forward. So let's come up with a good one soon? As
> outlined in
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013JanMar/0742.html
>
> Rules:
>
> 1) must reflect the intent and convey the meaning.
> 2) link type and name of the spec must match.
> 3) no biting.
>
> :DG<
>
Received on Tuesday, 26 March 2013 23:09:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 23:09:37 GMT