W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2013

Re: [CSSOM] Revisiting transforms and getBoundingClientRect()

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:30:56 +0200
To: "Dirk Schulze" <dschulze@adobe.com>, "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "Rik Cabanier" <cabanier@gmail.com>, "Simon Fraser" <smfr@me.com>, "Andrew Dupont" <w3@andrewdupont.net>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.w3lt9ufiidj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 23:45:36 +0200, Robert O'Callahan  
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Dirk Schulze <dschulze@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 15, 2013, at 7:59 AM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Robert O'Callahan  
>> <robert@ocallahan.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Alright, DOMPoint/DOMRect/DOMQuad works for me until someone else
>> objects...
>> >
>> > My understanding is that there's a consensus to rename  
>> ClientRect(List)
>> to DOMRect(List) and use DOMMatrix/DOMPoint/DOMQuad. Is this recorded
>> anywhere? If not, can someone please record it :-).
>>
>> Yes, we resolved that the CSS WG prefers DOM prefixes for geometric  
>> APIs.
>> [1]
>>
>
> OK, but that doesn't explicitly address renaming ClientRect(List), which
> unlike the APIs discussed in that chat log has some (probably miniscule)
> compatibility risk.

Has 'Client' as prefix been considered? I recall from the meeting that  
people didn't seem to care much what the prefix is, so long as it's  
consistent. Since we already have ClientRect...

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2013 11:31:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:08:34 UTC