W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2013

Re: [whatwg] Questions regarding Path object

From: Jürg Lehni <lists@scratchdisk.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:42:45 -0700
Message-Id: <18E5B2F8-5A03-4486-9EEE-CEC0FB3E80EE@scratchdisk.com>
To: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>
Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org

On Apr 9, 2013, at 16:17 , Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like the following naming scheme, as it is really short and already familiar for people from the Java world, but I can imagine that a prefix would be preferred.
> Path2D, Shape2D, Gradient2D, Matrix2D
> Path2d and Shape2d sound reasonable. I don't think there's a immediate need to harmonize gradients so we probably want to keep CanvasGradient.

Do you prefer the lowercase 'd' instead of the uppercase 'D'? I think most acronyms in JS are uppercased (e.g. JSON), so the latter seems more aligned with convention.

And what is required to get such a proposal through? I really think using 'Path' as a new global constructor at this point is a bad idea, and could cause quite a bit of trouble with apps out there.

Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 21:43:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:00 UTC