Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Web Translation API (Issue #948)

> > Capabilities could simply be a static method on the translator, no?
> 
> Sure, either way, although that's less symmetric than having each class vend its own instances, and takes us back toward kinda using classes as namespaces (just this time with static methods).

IMO It’s about what makes more sense in terms of entity-relationships. The human mental model is that we’re querying the capabilities of the translator; creating a `TranslatorCapabilities` object [^1] is not a natural language construct. 

Which actually makes me wonder if we need this object at all. Why not simply an async getter and an async function on `Translator`?

[^1]: as @martinthomson said, _please_ reconsider using "AI" as part of the name for any of these.

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/948#issuecomment-2259399668
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/948/2259399668@github.com>