- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2007 17:45:01 -0700
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>, public-webapi <public-webapi@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > > On Jul 2, 2007, at 3:50 PM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > >> >> 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. > > I really think the confusability of this with > selectNodes/selectSingleNode is a significant problem. matchSelector or > querySelector doesn't have this problem, and also doesn't have the > problems of cssQuery (slightly inaccurate mention of css, doesn't sound > like a verb phrase). > > But I won't stand in the way of an editorial decision on this one. Same feelings here. Except that IMHO matchSelector sounds like something that would return a bool indicating if an element matches the given selector. So querySelector is the one I like the most so far (except for getElementsBySelector, but I'm not even going to suggest that one :) ) / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2007 00:45:30 UTC