W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > October to December 2015

Re: [geometry] Name of DOMMatrix and related classes is out of place.

From: /#!/JoePea <trusktr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 11:42:51 -0800
Message-ID: <CAKU1PAVbv=iPyn-4+s1uLB_rQ+u2O0WA24Uk8hRN9SvKO3rwVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Cc: public-fx@w3.org
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:

> * I think the name should be consistent between the various interfaces in
> the Geometry spec.

* We can't use no prefix at all because Web content already uses "Point",
> "Matrix", etc.

* "DOM" is typically understood to include everything that is defined in
> terms of WebIDL these days, not just the objects that are descendants of
> window.document.

​"Document Object Model"​ isn't something you'll find inside WebGL.

* "DOMString" is a name that is used for all strings in the Web platform,
> and this hasn't been a problem in practice (although that name is not
> visible to JS).

​True, but DOMMatrix *will* be visible.​

* The common interactions with DOMMatrix will not involve touching the name
> itself, but more use methods called e.g. "transformMatrix" and so on.

* These names have been bikeshedded in the past, where we concluded that
> "DOM" prefix was least bad (it's short, globally applicable).

> All in all, I agree that it's not ideal (I would have preferred no prefix
> if the Web hadn't claimed the names), but I'm not convinced that it is a
> good idea to change the name of DOMMatrix at this point. In particular, I
> disagree that the name is inappropriate for 2d canvas or WebGL.

​Apparently, ​"GraphicalMatrix" isn't taken whatsoever:

"AffineMatrix" isn't used much:

"AffineTransformMatrix" has zero usage:

"GraphicalTransformMatrix" has also has zero usage:

Received on Tuesday, 3 November 2015 19:44:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:54 UTC