> I would like to open up the debate about the use of 'display' or 'html'
> again. I am wondering about the possibility of confusion between
> 'displaying' the code that generates the widget, and 'displaying' the
> value of the widget. Also, display() seems to imply a print. What if we
> got rid of both html() and display() and used draw() or render() for
> generating the code, and leave value() as it is. Or, if you want, you can
> shoot me for opening up this can of worms again :)
>
How about activate() or something else that can generically describe the
Widget... Theoretically, we could creaate a Timer widget (that does some
event after a certain time elaplses). In such a case, words like "display"
"draw" or "render" don't make sense... Of course, we're not really
"activating" the widgets either, as we're creating them on-the-fly in the
target environment (e.g., HTML), but my personal hilosophy when designing
"thing"s to be used by developers is to try to pick names for methods and
properties that are easy to understand and _make sense_... They'll
appreciate it.
Issac
|
