Hello all, What about something like Web Imports w/ rel=import . Basically it's a means to import a building block/component.
I think on the mailing list there was the suggestion of package. Seems reasonable too. Others that are in the same vein with equally generic issues include block and widget. Web Elements might also work, but the use of "element" may be a little overloaded. Neel ________________________________________ From: Dimitri Glazkov [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 3:03 PM To: public-webapps Cc: Elliott Sprehn; Angelina Fabbro; Brian Kardell; Steve Orvell; [email protected]; [email protected]; Dominic Cooney Subject: [webcomponents]: Naming the Baby Hello folks! It seems that we've had a bit of informal feedback on the "Web Components" as the name for the <link rel=component> spec (cc'd some of the "feedbackers"). So... these malcontents are suggesting that "Web Components" is more a of a general name for all the cool things we're inventing, and <link rel=component> should be called something more specific, having to do with enabling modularity and facilitating component dependency management that it actually does. I recognize the problem, but I don't have a good name. And I want to keep moving forward. So let's come up with a good one soon? As outlined in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013JanMar/0742.html Rules: 1) must reflect the intent and convey the meaning. 2) link type and name of the spec must match. 3) no biting. :DG<
