- From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 22:37:29 +0100
- To: Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
I'm with you :-) I really dislike the current name, and it keeps reminding me of XBEL, the bookmark exchanging language. Kenneth On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > Looking at the use cases and the problems the current XBL2 spec is > trying address, I think it might be a good idea to rename it into > something that is less legacy-bound? Hixie already cleverly disguised > the "X" as [X]engamous in the latest draft, and if this spec is to > become part of HTML, it probably should lose an 'L'. As for 'B', > describing what XBL2 aims to do as 'bindings' ain't super-accurate. > > The way I look at it, the problems we're trying to solve are: > > a) templating -- for astoundingly fast creation of DOM chunks using > declarative syntax; > b) shadow DOM -- for maximum-pleasure encapsulation and leak-free > component abstraction of DOM chunks; > c) binding -- for joy-filled extension and decoration DOM elements. > > Describing all these as just "Binding" just feels wrong. "Web > Components" perhaps or something along these lines? > > Who's with me? :) > > :DG< > > -- Kenneth Rohde Christiansen Senior Engineer Application and Service Frameworks, Nokia Danmark A/S Phone +45 4093 0598 / E-mail kenneth.christiansen at gmail.com http://codeposts.blogspot.com ﹆﹆﹆
Received on Tuesday, 14 December 2010 21:38:17 UTC