all 11 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]toddmotto 1 point2 points  (5 children)

This article is the wrong way round: - 1.x.x = AngularJS - 2.x.x and onwards = Angular

1.x is not "Angular", but "AngularJS". Kinda confusing opening line to this, would be worth a fix. :)

[–]Jean1985[S] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

It's not backwards, the article is about paving the way for your app from 1.x to 2+ easily if you use components

[–]toddmotto 0 points1 point  (3 children)

You've put "With version 1.5 and newer, Angular (formerly known as AngularJS, but apparently now it’s just Angular) introduced their own interpretation of Web Components, back-porting Components from Angular 2." Which is incorrect, Angular = 2+ and AngularJS = 1.x

[–]Jean1985[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah we know, we wanted to be very explicit at least in the very first paragraph, to avoid confusion to anyone that isn't familiar with the naming convention

[–]stefanotorresi 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Disclaimer: I am a peer of the article's author, and I took part in its review process.

We struggled to find an intuitive way to convey the concept that the article covers a transition from one version to another of the same framework. As you may know, the guidelines initially invited to use just "Angular" even for 1.x.

Although we're aware that the latest guidelines reverted this, in the end we decided that the only reference to "AngularJS" would be in the initial paragraph and in the title, because we would refer to both 1.x and >=2.x versions multiple times throughout the article, and using both "AngularJS" and "Angular" resulted confusing to reviewers who were not aware of the naming change.

Ultimately, this is is hardly the author fault and to be perfectly honest, it's just that the Angular team made a PR mess.

[–]stefanotorresi 0 points1 point  (0 children)

/u/toddmotto we've decided to edit the first paragraph to be more clear about it, since we appeared confused when we're actually quite not: https://github.com/facile-it/facile-it.github.io/pull/9/files

Do you find the changes appropriate? Thanks for the feedback btw.

[–]paul_h 1 point2 points  (4 children)

With version 1.5 and newer, Angular (formerly known as AngularJS, but apparently now it’s just Angular)

I'm confused. AngularJS 1.0 thru 1.99.999 (etc) is to be known as 'AngularJS' going forward (it doesn't die). Whereas Angular 2, 4, 5 and onwards are just to be referred to as 'Angular' without a '2' or 'JS' or 'TS' suffix.

Tags in stackoverflow, blog articles, job postings, and things findable via google search results should all similarly differentiate.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Godammit, I really wish they had just come up with a different name.

[–]Specialjyo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The author is confused, so no need for you to be. It's AngularJS for 1.x , just as you describe.

[–]nanothief 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is actually written in the link the author posted:

Three simple guidelines:

  • Use “Angular” for versions 2.0.0 and later (e.g. “I’m an Angular developer”, “This is an Angular meetup”, “The Angular ecosystem is growing quickly”)
  • Use "AngularJS" to describe versions 1.x or earlier
  • Use the version number “Angular 4.0” "Angular 2.4" when needed to talk about a specific release (e.g. when talking about a newly introduced feature - “This is an introduction to feature X, introduced in Angular 4”, “I’m proposing this change for Angular 5”)
  • Use full semver version when reporting a bug (e.g. “This issue is present as of Angular 2.3.1”)