Moving to [email protected] I don't think we are tied to a particular name for this, I think getElementsByGroupOfSelectors might be a little excessive :) However we'd just like the name to more clearly reflect the functionality rather than a generic sounding matchAll() which isn't really intended for generic use. It's our belief that it is important for names to reflect what they do where possible. Having a short name might save us all a few keystrokes but it is less clear to developers what the call is doing and can create bigger problems.
For examples sorry I meant staticNodeList. We have an example of it being returned in the spec but I don't see an example of it being accessed. We'd just like to be clear on how it is used. Thanks -Dave -----Original Message----- From: Anne van Kesteren [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 8:44 AM To: Dave Massy; Charles McCathieNevile; Web API WG Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Selectors API On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:39:24 +0100, Dave Massy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2006 17:38:59 +0100, Dave Massy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We're concerned that such a generic name implies other things and in our > experience a specific name even if it is longer is better for > developers. Can we make this feel more in line with the DOM API? So you're proposing we instead use: getElementByGroupOfSelectors() getElementsByGroupOfSelectors() ? I don't like that at all. > It's not clear how the static Selector object works out in Javascript > code. Can we put together an example? The specification is full of examples. What do you mean exactly? I think the "Selector" object is such is only relevant when you try to do Selector.prototype or something... By the way, it would be much better if this was discussed on [email protected] so developers following that list can give input as well. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
