- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 17:10:50 -0500
- To: "Robert Sayre" <sayrer@gmail.com>, "Robin Berjon" <robin@berjon.com>
- Cc: "Web APIs WG" <public-webapi@w3.org>
On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:05:13 -0500, Robert Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, I saw several comments from significant implementors that > indicated they were unhappy with getElementsListBySelector. I saw a handful of people saying they didn't like it. Maybe I have a different idea of what "significant" means, but then, I could be wrong. Unfortunately for me, I am still chair and still have to try and keep the group moving forward. > I don't > think the WG needs to provide detailed minutes, but a list of people > present at the meeting and a coherent rationale would do the trick. I spent the last couple of hours working over the minutes and just sent them to the group (and to the group we met with) for approval. You may or may not be happy with what you get - a volunteer who was observing the group was kind enough to take them, and did a reasonably good job, but not all the discussion was captured. Roughly speaking, the rationale was that nobody except Anne felt get was good, there was little support for match and strong resistance, and then we got getElementBySelectors as the only obvious choice for the single element method - which everyone except Anne was happy with. In looking for a plural, getElementListBySelector was chosen becuase it was easier to distinguish than getElementsBySelector - although we are interested in feedback on that choice, and if something else clearly gets consensus we will of course change it. cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk chaals@opera.com Try Opera 9.1 http://opera.com
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 22:11:05 UTC