1. Other Issues.
It'd be great to have more detail and scenario on NSResolver. It appears to
allow elements within the document to have different prefixes than things in
the style sheet. For example if we map html as the prefix for XHTML in our
document then we’d write it like:
<html:table><html:tr><html:td></html:td></html:tr></html:table>
But then we can write a selector such as:
“h|table > h|tr > h|td”
With a NSResolver that maps h to the same namespace as the html in the primary
document. This seems potentially confusing.
As I mentioned previously a more complete example of staticNodeList usage would
also be appreciated.
2. Naming
getElementBySelector/getElementsBySelector is the only proposal we think is
acceptable. match/matchAll is not appropriate for a specific DOM method and
matchSelector/matchAllSelectors isn't really much of an improvement.
I'm concerned the group appears to believe naming is not important based on the
belief that there is no such thing as the perfect name. While it is probably
true that there is no such thing as a perfect name we have to think about the
lives of web developers and the challenges they face. For these people
consistent naming helps them find their way around the APIs and have some idea
of what to expect from them. Members of this group may be fine with naming
something xabcdexy() but I'm not sure that this group is really representative
of the average web developer.
I'm more than familiar with "shipping is a feature" :) but shipping the right
thing at the right quality level is also important. We do believe the
functionality outlined in this spec is useful and want it to move forward as
quickly as it can. However we also want to ensure it is clear, easy to use and
easy to understand.
Thanks
-Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 8:52 AM
To: Web API public
Cc: Chris Wilson; Dave Massy; Anne van Kesteren
Subject: Re: Selectors API naming
OK folks,
Let's get this in perspective. We are trying to publish this document as a
last call, and get on with the dozen other documents we are meant to get
done in the next year. So I have two questions I would like answers on:
1. Does anyone see any other issue in the current draft that should be
fixed?
2. For the following options, do you consider the names "fine", "not great
but acceptable", or "unacceptable"?
getElementBySelector/getElementsBySelector
match/matchAll
matchSelector/matchAllSelectors
If and Only If you consider all 3 names are so bad as to be
unacceptable, please propose an alternative.
While getting naming perfect is a great thing, I don't know of it ever
being done before. "Shipping is a feature", as a friend who was a product
manager at a Redmond-based software company used to remind me, and if we
can't get nomenclative perfection then I suggest we at least enhance the
"shipping" side of our feature list...
cheers
Chaals (wearing a slightly ill-fitting chair's hat)
--
Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
