- From: David Håsäther <hasather@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:03:56 +0100
- To: Christophe Jolif <cjolif@ilog.fr>
- CC: "Web API WG (public)" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On 2007-02-06 14:58, Christophe Jolif wrote: > Hi David, > > David Håsäther wrote: >> On 2007-02-06 14:07, Christophe Jolif wrote: >> >>> Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >>>> Not having heard strong objections, and having had support for >>>> getElementsBySelector() that is at least as strong as anything else, >>>> I think (with my chair's hat) this can be taken as the current >>>> resolution of the naming debate. >>>> >>>> Which would also resolve ISSUE-110. >>>> >>>> Any objections? >>> >>> +1 >> >> Why? Because dojo has a method with a different name (not very similar >> in my opinion) that does something completely different? > > 1/ My support to this decision is not linked to what I just discovered > in dojo (actually just while typing my email) but just the consequence > of the arguments I already stated several times on this same list. In > short: everyone is not as omniscient as the "web short naming gurus", > most people need descriptive names to do their every day job correctly > with the tons of API they have to cope in today programming word. Sorry, I think I misunderstood you. I thought your "+1" was an objection, but I take it you meant that you support the "getElementsBySelector" proposal. If so, I agree with you :-) -- David Håsäther
Received on Tuesday, 6 February 2007 14:04:08 UTC