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

Re: [cssom-view] Drop "DOM" prefix from DOMRect et al?

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 23:13:32 +0200
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.w31ekuawidj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 12:53:12 +0200, Robert O'Callahan  
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
>
>> In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-script-coord/**
>> 2013JulSep/0666.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2013JulSep/0666.html>it  
>> was suggested that the "DOM" prefix be dropped from
>> DOMRect/DOMPoint/DOMQuad etc. TC39 consensus is to avoid using prefixes,
>> and JavaScript is going to introduce new names like System, Symbol, etc.
>> WebIDL interface objects are exposed as configurable objects in JS, so  
>> user
>> code can overwrite them. Also URL is introduced without prefix.
>>
>
> Tab explained in that thread some reasons why we want to use a prefix.
>
> User code can overwrite WebIDL interface objects, but if for example some
> user code wants to use the name Rect, it's a pain to mix that with other
> code that wants to use the DOM Rect API, so name collisions still have a
> cost.

Yeah, so let's stick with the prefix... It's inconsistent with other  
things, but OK.

> How are we going to settle this once and for all so it doesn't get  
> reopened
> again?

Ship it and wait until the Web depends on it? ;-)

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2013 21:14:09 UTC

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