JavaScript / ECMAScript

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by Martin Rinehart, Nov 12, 2008.

  1. Within this group many use ECMAScript as the name of the language,
    JavaScript as the name of Mozilla's implementation. I see zero support
    for this usage outside this group (where JavaScript is the name of
    the language and ECMAScript is the title of the standards document).
    Can someone clue me in?

    And why don't we follow standards and write EcmaScript?
    Martin Rinehart, Nov 12, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Martin Rinehart wrote:
    > Within this group many use ECMAScript as the name of the language,
    > JavaScript as the name of Mozilla's implementation. I see zero support
    > for this usage outside this group (where JavaScript is the name of
    > the language and ECMAScript is the title of the standards document).
    > Can someone clue me in?


    Use what you like, be prepared to be forced to explain the context. As
    for usage outside of the group, what about http://www.ecmascript.org/?
    That is an outlet for Mozilla and others to drive the development of the
    language and its standard.


    --

    Martin Honnen
    http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/
    Martin Honnen, Nov 12, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Martin Rinehart <> writes:

    > Within this group many use ECMAScript as the name of the language,
    > JavaScript as the name of Mozilla's implementation. I see zero support
    > for this usage outside this group (where JavaScript is the name of
    > the language and ECMAScript is the title of the standards document).
    > Can someone clue me in?


    The language was called JavaScript when it was first introduced in
    Netscape 2. The language and type attributes on script elements have
    always contained the name "javascript". The name is, de facto,
    javascript whenever people talk about it, standard or no standard.

    The standard was probably called ECMAScript:
    1. to avoid favoring either Mozilla or Microsoft by using JavaScript or
    JScript, and
    2. to avoid trademark problems with Sun (who owns the trademark on
    "JavaScript").

    In this group, it's some times necessary to distinguish between the
    language specified by the ECMAScript standard and the language
    implemented by a particular ECMAScript compliant language
    implementation.
    Although not quite as often as some people like to make the point.

    > And why don't we follow standards and write EcmaScript?


    Because that's not it's name? ECMA named it, so they got to pick the
    capitalization. They probably have guidelines saying that ECMA should
    only be written in all-caps.

    And what standards?

    /L
    --
    Lasse Reichstein Holst Nielsen
    DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
    'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'
    Lasse Reichstein Nielsen, Nov 12, 2008
    #3
  4. Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
    > Martin Rinehart <> writes:
    >> Within this group many use ECMAScript as the name of the language,
    >> JavaScript as the name of Mozilla's implementation. I see zero support
    >> for this usage outside this group (where JavaScript is the name of
    >> the language and ECMAScript is the title of the standards document).
    >> Can someone clue me in?

    >
    > In this group, it's some times necessary to distinguish between the
    > language specified by the ECMAScript standard and the language
    > implemented by a particular ECMAScript compliant language
    > implementation.


    ACK

    > Although not quite as often as some people like to make the point.


    It remains to be seen to what extent existing implementations differ from
    one another and from the standard. The published version of the ECMAScript
    Support Matrix currently only covers JavaScript and JScript, and that
    incomplete (more is still under construction).

    <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>

    >> And why don't we follow standards and write EcmaScript?

    >
    > Because that's not it's name? ECMA named it, so they got to pick the
    > capitalization. They probably have guidelines saying that ECMA should
    > only be written in all-caps.


    It's vice-versa. It was the ECMA (European Computer Manufacturers
    Association) when at least the first edition of the standard was written,
    and changed to Ecma International afterwards. The change in name was
    because of different membership; the change in case was to emphasize the
    "International" as compared "European". And, indeed, Ecma International has
    a number of internationally operating companies (that are not all computer
    manufacturers), as its members.

    <http://www.ecma-international.org/>


    PointedEars
    --
    Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
    who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
    the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
    -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$>
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Nov 12, 2008
    #4
  5. On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 at 23:30:27, in comp.lang.javascript, Thomas
    'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    >Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
    >> Martin Rinehart <> writes:


    <snip>
    >>> And why don't we follow standards and write EcmaScript?

    >>
    >> Because that's not it's name? ECMA named it, so they got to pick the
    >> capitalization. They probably have guidelines saying that ECMA should
    >> only be written in all-caps.

    >
    >It's vice-versa. It was the ECMA (European Computer Manufacturers
    >Association) when at least the first edition of the standard was written,
    >and changed to Ecma International afterwards. The change in name was
    >because of different membership; the change in case was to emphasize the
    >"International" as compared "European". And, indeed, Ecma International has
    >a number of internationally operating companies (that are not all computer
    >manufacturers), as its members.
    >
    ><http://www.ecma-international.org/>


    The ISO standard writes it as ECMAScript, everywhere. So do ECMA 262 v2
    and v3. That's good enough for me.

    John
    --
    John Harris
    John G Harris, Nov 13, 2008
    #5
  6. Martin Rinehart

    RobG Guest

    On Nov 14, 5:27 am, John G Harris <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 at 23:30:27, in comp.lang.javascript, Thomas
    >
    > 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    > >Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
    > >> Martin Rinehart <> writes:

    >
    >   <snip>
    >
    > >>> And why don't we follow standards and write EcmaScript?

    >
    > >> Because that's not it's name? ECMA named it, so they got to pick the
    > >> capitalization. They probably have guidelines saying that ECMA should
    > >> only be written in all-caps.

    >
    > >It's vice-versa.  It was the ECMA (European Computer Manufacturers
    > >Association) when at least the first edition of the standard was written,
    > >and changed to Ecma International afterwards.  The change in name was
    > >because of different membership; the change in case was to emphasize the
    > >"International" as compared "European".  And, indeed, Ecma International has
    > >a number of internationally operating companies (that are not all computer
    > >manufacturers), as its members.

    >
    > ><http://www.ecma-international.org/>

    >
    > The ISO standard writes it as ECMAScript, everywhere. So do ECMA 262 v2
    > and v3. That's good enough for me.


    Yes, and Ecma International continue to use "ECMA" for their published
    standards.

    <URL: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Standard.htm
    >



    --
    Rob
    RobG, Nov 14, 2008
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RC
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,641
    Martin Honnen
    Jun 14, 2006
  2. Python with Ecmascript

    , Jul 5, 2008, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    770
    Daniel Fetchinson
    Jul 11, 2008
  3. Joe Kelsey

    ECMAScript syntax

    Joe Kelsey, Aug 14, 2003, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    74
    Douglas Crockford
    Aug 14, 2003
  4. manno

    JavaScript ECMAScript definitions

    manno, Apr 23, 2004, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    207
    Richard Cornford
    May 7, 2004
  5. dhtml
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    417
    Peter Michaux
    Oct 13, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page