Re: Selectors API Method Names

On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 20:17:40 +0200, Doug Schepers  
<doug.schepers@vectoreal.com> wrote:

> Hi-
>
> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>  I don't have a strong objection either way, but I think the case  
>> against Lachy's original names (selectElement, etc) has been laid out  
>> more clearly than the case against cssQuery. I think selectorQuery (as  
>> suggested in follow-ups) would also be ok.
>
> I think that the chief problem with cssQuery*() for me is that it is  
> rather confusing.  Such a name would indicate functionality related to  
> CSS (that is, something presentational or style-oriented), rather than  
> the accident of a historical relationship.  It totally fails the  
> criteria of being functionally descriptive, which selectElement() meets  
> (other merits notwithstanding); this is a point on which I think we can  
> build consensus and compromise (and hopefully a speedy resolution).
>
> Similarly, with selectorQuery() (which is better), you lose the verby  
> "action word" of the existing naming convention (getAByB); selectorQuery  
> sounds more like a property than a method.
>
> Frankly, I'm not a fan of any of the present crop of names, but in the  
> interest of keeping forward momentum, I least object to what we  
> currently have, selectElement*().

Thank you Doug for so eloquently stating the details of my objection. As  
it happens, I agree with you that I would rather move forward with the  
consensus on selectElement*, if we establish that, than keep chasing round  
for new names.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
   Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com    Catch up: Speed Dial   http://opera.com

Received on Monday, 2 July 2007 22:50:49 UTC