On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Simon Pieters <sim...@opera.com> wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:57:17 +0200, Kang-Hao (Kenny) Lu > <kennyl...@csail.mit.edu> wrote: >> (12/06/18 22:45), Simon Pieters wrote: >>> >>> I think we should instead either fix the old API (if it turns out to not >>> Break the Web) or live with past mistake (if it turns out it does). To >>> find out whether it Breaks the Web (and the breakage can't be evanged), >>> I suggest we ship the backwards-incompatible change to querySelector() >>> in nightly/aurora (or equivalent) in one or more browsers for some time. >> >> I didn't read through all the QSA threads, but isn't the function name >> itself a mistake that many people don't want to live with? > > We have lots of shipped APIs with worse names. I think we should live with > past mistakes, try not to make them again, and move on.
This is not a good argument. qSA is used often enough, and has a long enough name, that the name is actually a pretty significant misfeature. This is a pretty core API, and both it and its precursors (getElementByID, etc.) are very commonly renamed by libraries precisely because you need a very short name for such a commonly used function. ~TJ