Re: [selectors4][naming] Naming the drag-and-drop pseudo-classes

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> To help us resolve the naming issue in the Selectors spec about the
> drag-and-drop pseudo-classes, we created a survey to help collect web
> author responses:
>
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/11Wif3cmrDtEleeED8fWMP9uKgZXdZVLkm-MOF6TUpDE/viewform
>
> Please fill it out if you have any opinions. ^_^

It's been a week, and we've gotten nearly 800 responses, way more than
I anticipated.  We should do this in the future!

Here are the results
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmRB4Bq4bNRBdEw4TlU5cGNTNGQ1VHF4ZFFORTFoTkE&usp=sharing>:

155 votes (20%) for :drop / :can-drop / :no-drop
157 votes (20%) for :active-drop / :drop / :no-drop
193 votes (24%) for :current-drop-target / :valid-drop-target /
:invalid-drop-target
287 votes (36%) for :current-drop / :valid-drop / :invalid-drop

That's a pretty clear win for the fourth set, with nearly twice the
votes as any other set.

The alternate suggestions were pretty interesting, too.  They were
pretty varied, as might be expected from freeform input, but
":active-drop / :valid-drop / :invalid-drop" was the most popular,
with roughly a quarter of all the custom suggestions.

One particular custom suggestion jumped out at me as an interesting
possibility: a :drop([active | valid | invalid]) function pseudoclass.
 This not only puts the "drop" part first, which was called out as a
good thing in several of the feedback entries, it also gives a natural
extension point.

So, I suggest we make a final decision for this at next week's call,
and choose between:

1. :current-drop / :valid-drop / :invalid-drop
2. :active-drop / :valid-drop / :invalid-drop
3. :drop(active) / :drop(valid) / :drop(invalid)

~TJ

Received on Friday, 16 August 2013 06:03:21 UTC