Hi David,
David Håsäther wrote:
On 2007-02-06 14:07, Christophe Jolif wrote:
Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
Not having heard strong objections, and having had support for
getElementsBySelector() that is at least as strong as anything else,
I think (with my chair's hat) this can be taken as the current
resolution of the naming debate.
Which would also resolve ISSUE-110.
Any objections?
+1
Why? Because dojo has a method with a different name (not very similar
in my opinion) that does something completely different?
1/ My support to this decision is not linked to what I just discovered
in dojo (actually just while typing my email) but just the consequence
of the arguments I already stated several times on this same list. In
short: everyone is not as omniscient as the "web short naming gurus",
most people need descriptive names to do their every day job correctly
with the tons of API they have to cope in today programming word.
2/ As I said I just discovered the dojo method, so I might be wrong, but
it looks to me that getElementsByClass returns the elements matching a
particular CSS class just as getElementsBySelector is returning the
elements matching a given CSS selector. A short test is confirming it
does that (and maybe other stuff but at least that)... So that looks
actually very similar to me in the way the naming is done and the fact
matching on the CSS class is a subset of matching on any CSS selector.
But I might have missed something, please be more explicit when you say
they are *completely* different?
--
Christophe
