Re: data-* attributes [was: Re: ISSUE-41/ACTION-97 decentralized-extensibility]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Shelley Powers <> wrote:
>> It is, but data-* does a poor job.
>> SVGWeb can use a name, another JS library use the same name, and if a
>> person wants to use both JS libraries together, they're screwed.
>> The fact that data-* had no ability to enforce a consistent name clash
>> prevention shows they're really not useful for decentralized
>> extensibility.
> I can't tell from searching around on the svgweb demos how it uses
> data-* attributes, but this really shouldn't be a problem in practice.
> If svgweb uses data-svgweb-* attributes, frex, then the chance of
> clashing with another library is basically nil.  Before starting any
> new library one should probably google for a bit to make sure that
> one's preferred name for the project isn't already being used.
> Before you can say that data-* is "really not useful for decentralized
> extensibility", you'd have to show how, even with this basic friendly
> practice of "self-namespacing", there were clashes in data-* attribute
> naming in practice with half-significant libraries.  Preferably, you'd
> show how this actually caused some authors some grief, such as through
> bug reports or forum posts complaining.

Actually, with all due respect, I don't need to show anything. I
support the Microsoft initial effort, and believe that it is the
approach we should working with, and assisting Tony in solving any
problems with the approach.

But I encourage you to submit a new proposal for using data-* as a
solution for decentralized extensibility.

I think it's acceptable to submit multiple proposals for the same
issue. Maciej, would this be OK?

> I'll note that a similar practice is used in jQuery's plugin
> architecture, and it generally works fine.  Even though everyone wants
> their plugin to have a short name, there are just *so many* names to
> choose from that it's pretty easy to find a good unique one.
> I suspect that this style of self-policed namespacing is used widely
> in this sort of space.  Have there been any notable failures?
> ~TJ


Received on Monday, 19 October 2009 19:24:01 UTC