On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org> > wrote: > > I think if we're going to use any prefix, we should use the same prefix > for > > Point, Rect, Quad and Matrix. I'm afraid to arrogate those names as-is. > > Either DOM or CSS would work for me. Blink has already got an > implementation > > of CSSMatrix so I think we may as well go with the "CSS" prefix. Yes, > it's > > useful for more than just CSS, but that doesn't bother me. > > Note that Dirk's the maintainer of that code, and he's planning to > rename the interface, I think to TransformMatrix. That prefix isn't > good for point/rect/quad, though. > Alright, DOMPoint/DOMRect/DOMQuad works for me until someone else objects... > I can't see how "Node sourceNode" is more helpful than "Node from". But I > > agree about the ordering. > > On first glance, I had no clue what the relation was between the > passed node and quad, and what the quad was getting transformed to. > Linking the two args by name in the IDL makes it clearer that they're > interpreted together, and the "source" prefix makes it clearer that > there's an implicit "destination" node (what it's called on) and quad > (what's returned). > As you wish. It's certainly not worth spending any more time discussing :-). Rob -- Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w * *
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2013 02:12:27 UTC