- From: Joseph Kesselman <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:13 -0500
- To: www-dom@w3.org
I accidentally answered Dieter's question on the IG list rather than on the public list, where he asked it. Reposting: >Is an implementation in other languages than Java or ECMAScript still conformant >if totally different names are chosen? By our current definition, I think the answer is "yes, but this would fail my own criteria for quality-of-implementation." Part of the goal of the DOM is to minimize relearning as people move between implementations. That implies that renaming should be absolutely minimized, and that idiomatic compatabilty with the DOM spec is more important than idiomatic comptability with other classes in the same system. If there's a keyword conflict, I would recommend a minimal and systematic change -- which means finding all the conflicts, then considering whether there's a simple and obvious transformation that can be applied to those names to resolve them. If you really want both count() and length(), write both into your implementation... but length() will be preferred by anyone who may want to reapply their DOM code elsewhere. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Tuesday, 30 January 2001 11:32:36 UTC