On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:54:04 -0500, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[roughly accurate assumptions about how we reached the conclusion snipped...] > How about the following (suggested in various places on the thread): > > cssQuery()/cssQueryAll() Bjoern's suggestion never got any apparent support, Anne has been vociferous in the past in pointing out that it isn't about CSS, and it was possibly confusing what it does. > bySelector()/bySelectorAll() > bySelector()/listBySelector() Something like this was considered and rejected as not really satisying anyone (not short enough for the little-endians, not clear enough for the big-endians). > getBySelector()/getBySelectorAll() > > Note that CSS selectors today cannot address non-element nodes, > however, this may not be the case for all time. If they ever become > able to address text nodes directly, it will actually be better not > to have "Element" in the name. If I recall correctly, this was considered and didn't get enough support to make it onto the board. Maybe it wasn't really considered enough. > Here are other brief names that make the connection to Selectors (AKA > CSS Selectors) clear in varying degrees: > > queryCSS() > matchCSS() > cssMatch() > matchSelector() > matchSel() > bySel() > querySel() > querySelector() > > (Various forms of long names left as an excercise to the reader). > > Please consider both of these sets of names to be my constructive > alternate proposals, as requested. So, is there consensus in the group to shift to one of these (or to something else, potentially including things we rejected earlier)? cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Try Opera 9.1 http://opera.com
