Re: [selectors-4] bikeshed on profiles

I'm not precious at all over the names suggested however the current names
are not as clear as they could be (as it seems everyone agrees with anyway).

One thing that was highlighted is the lack of explanation around the
separation of the profiles and why they exist.

Once Brian mentioned that the complete profile was used by the likes of
querySelectorAll to statically get results one time rather than 'fast'
which matches dynamically the concept became much more clear why the
separation exists.

On 8 April 2015 at 17:34, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Brian Kardell <bkardell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It seems a lot of people are confused by the 'fast' and 'complete'
> > profiles especially because of the name 'fast'... We have spent a a
> > lot of time discussing why they even exist.
> >
> > Jonathan Kingston‏ (@KingstonTime) mentioned to me the same, and so
> > I'm just wondering if we're doing ourselves extra harm by calling it
> > 'fast'.  It's not 'fast' in so much as 'what we already do and know
> > how to do in order to do the dynamic selector matching that is CSS'.
> >
> > So, what about just renaming them 'static-profile' and
> > 'dynamic-profile' as you can explain why right there in the spec and
> > it should be a little easier for people to grok and avoid confusion..
>
> These names are fine with me.  It communicates pretty well what they
> actually mean, and gives a better idea of what things might not be
> appropriate for the "fast" (dynamic) version.
>
> Also, bz gave this set a +1 in another thread.
>
> ~TJ
>
>