The abbreviation "AI" is not timeless

[nt1m]

This API references AI multiple times in the naming. I'm not sure in 5-10 years time people will still think of it as AI. AI is also an implementation detail in some way, the API should be named in a way that abstracts that away.

[domenic]

How do you feel about similar abbreviations in other web APIs, e.g. CSS, GPU, HTML, CSP, DOM, HTTP, SVG, RTC, ...?

[nt1m]

I think those which describe an end result are fine (e.g. cascading style sheets, real-time communication, content security policy, document object model, etc.).

WebGPU is a bit of a unfortunate one since it describes the means (GPU) unlike WebGL which describes the end result (Graphics Library).

AI isn't really an end result by itself, the end result is the summarizer/writer/rewriter in this case. "Writing assistant" or "writing tools" (Apple's official term for these) would be better terms in general.

[nt1m]

(It's possible that the AI bit gets replaced by some computer advancement in the future? who knows?)

[nt1m]

There's also WebNN which is an interesting case, it uses the ML namespace. I'm not too familiar with the topic but the end result does definitely look like some sort of ML low-level primitive, so ML seems OK here.

But ML would have been inappopriate if you started using ml.detectShape(), mainly because the end result is detecting a shape, not ML by itself.

[domenic]

Got it. We discussed related issues in https://github.com/WICG/writing-assistance-apis?tab=readme-ov-file#alternative-api-spellings ; to quote that,

We are open to such surface-level tweaks to the API entry points, and intend to gather more data from web developers on what they find more understandable and clear.