Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-06 Thread David Flanagan

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).



This is an editorial issue, and Anne is the editor. It should be his 
perogative to name the spec he's put so much work into.  Editing specs 
is hard work; let's not create needless headaches for the editors. 
Everyone has had a chance to make their suggestions, now let's just let 
Anne publish his spec under whatever name he chooses. Its just a name!


David



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-06 Thread Charles Pritchard

On 9/6/11 9:18 AM, David Flanagan 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).



This is an editorial issue, and Anne is the editor. It should be his 
perogative to name the spec he's put so much work into.  Editing specs 
is hard work; let's not create needless headaches for the editors. 
Everyone has had a chance to make their suggestions, now let's just 
let Anne publish his spec under whatever name he chooses. Its just a 
name!


I'm not standing in his way, but I can at least point-out that the DOM* 
name has lead to additional work in other specs, such as the web 
messaging specs. It seems like an optimization, to me, as I outlined in 
my prior e-mail.


If it needs to be officially stated (I'm not a w3c member): I'm fine 
with Anne naming his specification DOM Core Level 4, or whatever variant 
of DOM he is looking to publish under.


-Charles



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-06 Thread Charles Pritchard

On 9/5/11 2:38 PM, Adam Barth wrote:

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com  wrote:
   

On Sep 5, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Adam Barthw...@adambarth.com  wrote:
 

On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Charles Pritchardch...@jumis.com  wrote:
   

On 9/4/11 6:39 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 15:12:45 +0200, Arthur Barstowart.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.  :)
   

Or calling a browser Chrome.
 

:)

   

Web Core does implement web core, doesn't it?
 

Yes, but it also implements HTML5, which isn't part of Web Core.

   


HTML5 includes DOMCore in its dependencies.
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/infrastructure.html#dependencies

From the DOMCore goals: moving features from HTML5 that ought to be 
part of the DOM platform here, while preventing a dependency on HTML5.


DOMCore specifies the EventTarget, from which Node, Element and Document 
inherit, as well as the Event class, from which even non-node classes, 
such as web messaging, inherit. And the DOMException enumeration.


The web core sub-directory contains modules (such as workers) which 
include DOMCore as the root of their dependency chain. The naming seems 
appropriate to me.


All that said, I'll re-assert: I'm fine with Anne taking the name of 
DOMCore in the direction of his choosing. I still believe that Web 
Core as a name and semantic has more utility than DOM4, both in the 
authoring of specifications and the implementation of various specs 
which build upon EventTarget and/or Event as their root interface.


-Charles




Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Jarred Nicholls
On Sep 4, 2011, at 5:09 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).

Without hesitation, I concur.  +1

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
 
 




Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Anne van Kesteren
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:08:25 +0200, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com  
wrote:

I propose calling it Web Core.
WC1 (Web Core version 1).


It is a somewhat compelling idea, but I think we should keep DOM in the  
name given that everything it builds on did too.




The Web semantic is popular, easy.


All our specifications are about the web. Web is just the new X  
(Extensible), not very useful.



--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Charles Pritchard

On 9/5/11 8:14 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:08:25 +0200, Charles Pritchard 
ch...@jumis.com wrote:

I propose calling it Web Core.
WC1 (Web Core version 1).


It is a somewhat compelling idea, but I think we should keep DOM in 
the name given that everything it builds on did too.




The Web semantic is popular, easy.


All our specifications are about the web. Web is just the new X 
(Extensible), not very useful.



I don't believe the Document semantic is as appropriate to web apps as 
it was in the 90s.


I understand that everything is a document is a popular opinion.

X has traditionally been used for markup language, as an abbreviation 
for XML.

The ML suffix is also popular, also used for XML documents.

DOMCore provides a base system for the interconnection of a 
heterogeneous network of objects, whether documents, scripting objects, 
user agents, or client/server machines. Web seems appropriate. 
Corresponding to the same web platform that Web IDL targets.


Otherwise stated: Web Core is the base system used to transfer Web IDL 
objects.


The DOM semantic is already overloaded.
Here's an example of how that semantic baggage requires disambiguation.

http://dev.w3.org/html5/postmsg/
The term DOM is used to refer to the API set made available to scripts 
in Web applications, and does not necessarily imply the existence of an 
actual Document object or of any other Node objects as defined in the 
DOM Core specifications


In the references section, [DOMCORE] refers to Web DOM Core.

That's two examples of the cost of maintaining the DOM semantic.

Messaging specifications would benefit, particularly that one:
The reference would be fixed to say Web Core, [DOMEVENTS] and 
[DOMCORE] would be changed to [WEBCORE], DOM events to Web Core 
Events, the terminology warning removed and [WEBCORE] added to 
dependencies.



-Charles




Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread João Eiras



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).


Without hesitation, I concur.  +1

Jarred



It needs DOM on the name, so it is really not suitable.

I think DOM4 is definitely the way to go, kind like how html5 completely  
replaced html4.




Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Adam Barth
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


 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






Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Jarred Nicholls


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
 
 
 
 



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Jarred Nicholls


Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2011, at 3:42 PM, Jarred Nicholls jar...@extjs.com wrote:

 
 
 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

Given Adam's kidney shot point, I will have to renig and say DOM4.  Everyone 
knows what it means even if the acronym can't be taken literally, and vendors 
refer to it heavily in code already.  The point of HTML4 = HTML5 was well 
received.

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
 
 
 
 
 



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Charles Pritchard




On Sep 5, 2011, at 12:06 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.  :)

Or calling a browser Chrome.

Web Core does implement web core, doesn't it?
 
 



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Adam Barth
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:
 On Sep 5, 2011, at 12:06 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.  :)

 Or calling a browser Chrome.

:)

 Web Core does implement web core, doesn't it?

Yes, but it also implements HTML5, which isn't part of Web Core.

Adam



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-05 Thread Jarred Nicholls


Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 5, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Charles Pritchard ch...@jumis.com wrote:

 
 
 
 
 On Sep 5, 2011, at 12:06 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.  :)
 
 Or calling a browser Chrome.
 
 Web Core does implement web core, doesn't it?

Among a lot of other things e.g. SVG canvas and various html5 things

 
 
 



Re: [DOM] Name

2011-09-04 Thread Charles Pritchard

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).

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