On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Brian Kardell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Dec 11, 2013 11:48 PM, "Ryosuke Niwa" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 11, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Dominic Cooney <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ... > >>> El 11/12/2013 21:10, "Edward O'Connor" <[email protected]> escribió: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> The name "register" is very generic and could mean practically > anything. > >>>> We need to adopt a name for document.register() that makes its purpose > >>>> clear to authors looking to use custom elements or those reading > someone > >>>> else's code that makes use of custom elements. > >> > >> I think the method should be called registerElement, for these reasons: > >> > >> - It's more descriptive about the purpose of the method than just > "register." > >> - It's not too verbose; it doesn't have any redundant part. > >> - It's nicely parallel to registerProtocolHandler. > > > > > > I'd still refer declareElement (or defineElement) since registerElement > sounds as if we're registering an instance of element with something. > Define and declare also match SGML/XML terminologies. > > > > - R. Niwa > > > > Define/declare seem a little confusing because we are in the imperative > space where these have somewhat different connotations. It really does > seem to me that conceptually we are registering (connecting the definition) > with the parser or something. For whatever that comment is worth. > While there's no consensus, I think this thread expresses a slightly stronger preference for registerElement than other proposals. I have filed this bug suggesting registerElement. <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24087> Dominic
