"The new JavaScript: ECMAScript 6"? On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Juriy Zaytsev <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think JavaScript 6 will only make things more confusing (remember > JavaScript 1.7, 1.8, etc. in Mozilla?). > > More and more people learn what ECMAScript is. ES6 / ECMAScript 6 seems > the most appropriate (and least surprising) name. > > -- > kangax > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Axel Rauschmayer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I’m in the process of coming up with a good title for a book on >> ECMAScript 6. That begs the question: What is the best way to refer to >> ECMAScript 6? >> >> 1. The obvious choices: ECMAScript 6 or ES6. >> 2. Suggested by Allen [1]: JavaScript 2015. >> >> The advantage of #2 is that many people don’t know what ECMAScript 6 is. >> However, I’m worried that a book that has “2015” in its title will appear >> old in 2016. And the year scheme completely breaks with current tradition. >> I see two possibilities: >> >> * If there is a concerted effort to establish “JavaScript 2015” then I >> would support that and name my book accordingly. >> * Otherwise, JavaScript 6 is interesting: People who are aware of >> ECMAScript 6 will recognize it, but it will also mean something to people >> who don’t know what ECMAScript is. Is 2015, 2016, … really that much better >> than 6, 7, 8, … ? Would skipped years pose a problem for the former naming >> scheme? >> >> Axel >> >> [1] https://twitter.com/awbjs/status/558316031039381504 >> >> -- >> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer >> [email protected] >> rauschma.de >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
