Skip to content

Conversation

@AurelioDeRosa
Copy link
Member

Fix issue #609

@arthurvr
Copy link
Member

arthurvr commented Mar 1, 2015

I think we prefer method over type these days, so we should reflect that. All examples should be changed to use method, and type should be defined as a alias of method, not vice-versa.

@AurelioDeRosa
Copy link
Member Author

I'd say that it's method to be an alias as it was introduced later and for the reasons explained in the relative ticket. I agree that it's more descriptive of what the property means (HTTP method used) but I think there is also no plan for deprecate type? But this is my opinion, so I'd like to see what others have to say about it.

@dmethvin
Copy link
Member

dmethvin commented Mar 1, 2015

For people switching between native and jQuery usage, the method makes more sense so I'd give preference to that. The term type has so many meanings that it doesn't explain much. However, I agree we haven't deprecated and wouldn't dare remove 😸 the type property.

@arthurvr
Copy link
Member

arthurvr commented Mar 6, 2015

Yeah, I think we should prefer method as well. @AurelioDeRosa Can you give this PR some updates to reflect that?

Updated PR based on the discussion.
@AurelioDeRosa
Copy link
Member Author

PR updated.

@arthurvr
Copy link
Member

arthurvr commented Mar 9, 2015

Wow. Looks good, @AurelioDeRosa. I'm wondering if we should update all of our examples too.

@AurelioDeRosa
Copy link
Member Author

I agree that we should update the examples too. I'll update the PR again.

@arthurvr
Copy link
Member

arthurvr commented Mar 9, 2015

You rock, @AurelioDeRosa.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know it was just takeover from the type option, but some nitpicks.

default is "GET".

Seems like weird to say this again, as we already indicate that just a line above that: http://gyazo.com/3e298875859e35d8dfdcef35f71ab3ac

(e.g. "POST", "GET", "PUT")

Maybe wrap these in <code> elements.

@arthurvr
Copy link
Member

arthurvr commented Mar 9, 2015

Looks good. Merging.

@arthurvr arthurvr closed this in cc962b2 Mar 9, 2015
@AurelioDeRosa AurelioDeRosa deleted the patch-3 branch March 9, 2015 20:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants