r.mark.volkmann at gmail.com
Thu Jan 22 16:18:16 PST 2015
I do the same as Kevin.
R. Mark Volkmann
Object Computing, Inc.
> On Jan 22, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, here's the rule of thumb that I tend to use:
> - When referring to a specific version of the language, it's ESx (e.g. ES5, ES6, ES7).
> - When referring to the specification itself (e.g. in proposals), it's ECMAScript.
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote:
>> I’m in the process of coming up with a good title for a book on ECMAScript 6. That begs the question: What is the best way to refer to ECMAScript 6?
>> 1. The obvious choices: ECMAScript 6 or ES6.
>> The advantage of #2 is that many people don’t know what ECMAScript 6 is. However, I’m worried that a book that has “2015” in its title will appear old in 2016. And the year scheme completely breaks with current tradition. I see two possibilities:
>>  https://twitter.com/awbjs/status/558316031039381504
>> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
>> axel at rauschma.de
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss