Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 5, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Adam Barth <w...@adambarth.com> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Charles Pritchard <ch...@jumis.com> wrote: >> On 9/4/11 6:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: >> >> On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:12:45 +0200, Arthur Barstow <art.bars...@nokia.com> >> wrote: >> >> The CfC to publish a new WD of DOM Core was blocked by this RfC. I will >> proceed with a request to publish a new WD of DOM Core in TR/. The name DOM >> Core will be used for the upcoming WD. If anyone wants to propose a name >> change, please start a *new* thread. >> >> Given that the specification replaces most of DOM2 and DOM3 I suggest we >> name it DOM4, including for the upcoming WD (or alternatively a WD we >> publish a couple of weeks later). >> >> I propose calling it "Web Core". >> WC1 (Web Core version 1). > > WebCore is one of the major implementation components of WebKit. > Calling this spec Web Core might be confusing for folks who work on > WebKit. It would be somewhat like calling a spec Presto. :) > > Adam "WebCore" != "Web Core" any webkit engineer understands the difference ;) In all seriousness that's unfortunate. I find DOM to be rather antiquated in this context. "Platorm Core" maybe...the core of the Web Platform. Jarred > > >> The "Web" semantic is popular, easy. >> >> The w3c lists are heavy with the "web" semantic: web apps, web components, >> web events. >> The primary dependency for DOMCore is named Web IDL. >> >> It'd give DOM3 some breathing room, to go down its own track. >> >> I'd much prefer to go around referring to Web IDL and Web Core. >> >> -Charles >> >> >> >
