Microsoft said "XMLHttpRequest" in August 1999 [*1], a month before
feature request for Mozilla [*2].
[*1]
https://web.archive.org/web/19990828184122/http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/reference/scriptref/XMLHttpRequest_Object.asp
[*2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15119
On 2017/07/12 5:53, Alexander Jones wrote:
Just for funsies I looked this up - In the interests of honesty I should
point out that apparently it was Mozilla who named this `XMLHttpRequest`
thing.
https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/157375/why-does-xmlhttprequest-not-seem-to-follow-a-naming-convention
On 11 July 2017 at 13:07, Alexander Jones <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Occasionally this comes up when deciding on a spelling for
something. There are numerous examples in ECMAScript and other Web
standards that seem to defy the most uniform convention:
* `JSON` vs. `Json`
* `toJSON` vs. `toJson`
* `XMLHttpRequest` vs. `XmlHttpRequest`
* `DOMElement` vs. `DomElement`
While it looks initially strange to specifically drop the capital
letters on an initialisms like XML, the rule is simple in that it
has an obvious machine decoding - a capital letter starts a new
word. Thus, translations of identifiers to other case conventions
are automatic (so long as numbers never appear at the start of a
word). This helps a lot when e.g. generating bindings for IDLs to
different languages, or in general interfacing different systems
that really, really want to use their own naming conventions.
* mixed case: `myTlaIdentifierHere`
* pascal case: `MyTlaIdentifierHere`
* underscore case: `my_tla_identifier_here`
* uppercase: `MY_TLA_IDENTIFIER_HERE`
* kebab case: `my-tla-identifier-here`
* spaces case: `my tla identifier here`
---
My question is whether there is an existing community recommendation
anywhere for naming ECMAScript identifiers. Clearly, when Microsoft
devised the name `XMLHttpRequest`, someone was having a difficult
time figuring out how to spell adjacent initialisms in PascalCase.
If there is no recommendation, perhaps there should be? Is there any
scope for non-normative sections of information like this in the
ECMAScript spec?
Thanks
Alex
_______________________________________________
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
