Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Sender: niclas@envision.asiaconnect.com.my
Message-ID: <38A25A50.C3F92960@localbar.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 14:27:28 +0800
From: Niclas Hedhman <niclas@localbar.com>
Organization: Bali Automation Sdn Bhd
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Class Naming, SAX 2.0, and Cocoon 2.0
References: <38A1C889.8B9DB143@earthlink.net> <38A1DAB7.E16FB065@apache.org>
 <38A1F471.18D40A99@apache.org> <38A225AB.A3763589@localbar.com>
 <38A238F6.8330D148@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Brett McLaughlin wrote:

> Anyone programming Cocoon *better* know SAX, or else they aren't ready
> to be coding Cocoon.  It (and DOM, and XML, and XSLT) need to be at
> least familiar to the coder, or I get concerned.  Certainly many learn
> these things as they go; but even in this case, are we aiding or
> confusing that learning by using names?  If someone had a class named
> Node (from DOM) or SAX (duh?), people would be confused; while this is
> not *quite* so apparant, it still is a problem; as mentioned earlier, I
> spent 10 minutes writing an e-mail before I saw the package name.

Is this implicit import related, since I personally have never been 'annoyed'
over same name in different packages, such as java.util.Date and
java.sql.Date. In my mindset, ever name is always complete with the package,
perhaps influenced by my use of explicit imports.

So, there seem to be consensus of the name changes (Brett yelling loudest :o)
, so how about simply putting an additional word in front.

Dynamic, Cocoon, Extended, Enhanced, Request, SAX (even more confusing)...

Niclas