W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: [geometry] DOMRectList with legacy

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 12:46:08 +0200
Message-ID: <1055733587.20140722124608@w3.org>
To: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
CC: Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com>, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@annevk.nl>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, FX <public-fx@w3.org>, "ms2ger@gmail.com" <ms2ger@gmail.com>
Hello Domenic,

Monday, July 21, 2014, 9:05:49 PM, you wrote:

> From: Dirk Schulze [mailto:dschulze@adobe.com] 

>> We can not use "MUST NOT" because then no interface can use it at all - not even getClientsRect() :). "SHOULD NOT" is the right technical term though. Are you fine with that?

> I'm feeling bad for continuing the back-and-forth on such a trivial
> point, but what about "APIs besides getClientRects() MUST NOT"?

Suggest adding a reason so other APIs don't try to add to the set:

With the sole exception of getClientRects() (for legacy
compatibility), API's MUST NOT ...

But the above wording from Domenic is fine too if people prefer it.

-- 
Best regards,
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2014 10:46:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:22 UTC