Re: [custom elements] Improving the name of document.register()

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 5:17 AM, piranna@gmail.com <piranna@gmail.com>wrote:

> I have seen registerProtocolHandler() and it's being discused
> registerServiceWorker(). I believe registerElementDefinition() or
> registerCustomElement() could help to keep going on this path.
>
> Send from my Samsung Galaxy Note II
> El 11/12/2013 21:10, "Edward O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com> escribió:
>
> Hi,
>>
>> The name "register" is very generic and could mean practically anything.
>> We need to adopt a name for document.register() that makes its purpose
>> clear to authors looking to use custom elements or those reading someone
>> else's code that makes use of custom elements.
>>
>
I support this proposal.


> Here are some ideas:
>>
>> document.defineElement()
>> document.declareElement()
>> document.registerElementDefinition()
>> document.defineCustomElement()
>> document.declareCustomElement()
>> document.registerCustomElementDefinition()
>>
>> I like document.defineCustomElement() the most, but
>> document.defineElement() also works for me if people think
>> document.defineCustomElement() is too long.
>>
>>
I think the method should be called registerElement, for these reasons:

- It's more descriptive about the purpose of the method than just
"register."
- It's not too verbose; it doesn't have any redundant part.
- It's nicely parallel to registerProtocolHandler.

If I had to pick from the list Ted suggested, I think defineElement is the
best of that bunch and also an improvement over just "register". It doesn't
line up with registerProtocolHandler, but there's some poetry to
defineElement/createElement.


>> Ted
>>
>> P.S. Sorry for the bikeshedding. I really believe we can improve the
>> name of this function to make its purpose clear.
>
>
I searched for bugs on this and found none; I expect this was discussed but
I can't find a mail thread about it. The naming of register is something
that's been on my mind so thanks for bringing it up.

Dominic