-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Should we use affordance instead of interaction? #241
Comments
Yes we should |
For JS developers the term "interaction" is intelligible, whereas "affordance" is a more special term, mainly for WoT-insiders... We could make an editor's note perhaps to say that "interaction" in this document matches to "interaction affordance" in the TD spec. |
Or the other way around. Stick with WoT terminology "affordance" and given a hint to JS developers. |
Scripting Call Aug 31:
|
Throughout the document, we often use WoT interaction referring to Properties/Actions/Events. Should we changed to WoT affordance?
Derived from #239
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: