- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 14:26:34 -0700
- To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Cc: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Anant Narayanan <anant@mozilla.com>, Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com>, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On 18 June 2012 13:44, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote: > Anything works for me - thought the idea of prefixing things with Web in a browser seems oddly redundant but I'm perfectly happy with any decision on what the prefix is. That, plus the weird mix of upper and lower case that I guarantee will be a constant annoyance. Of course, everyone remembers that it's XMLHttpRequest, or was it XmlHTTPRequest... Should consistency be the goal, then I propose RtcPEeRConnectioN. Can someone more deeply versed in the naming rules come forth with an explanation of why these classes couldn't be moved to a namespace of their own as Anant suggests (i.e., RTC.PeerConnection)?
Received on Monday, 18 June 2012 21:27:03 UTC