cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "N. Sean Timm" <st...@mailgo.com>
Subject Re: [C2] Package names
Date Sun, 02 Jul 2000 20:43:58 GMT
I agree with Mark.  +1 on singular names, but it really isn't that big of a
deal, so +0 on plural, too.  :)

- Sean T.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Washeim" <esalon@canuck.com>
To: <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2000 11:42 AM
Subject: Re: [C2] Package names


> on 2/7/00 7:39 pm, Mark Washeim at esalon@canuck.com wrote:
>
> > on 2/7/00 3:23 pm, Stefano Mazzocchi at stefano@apache.org wrote:
> >
> >> Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> >>>
> >>> In the sitemap proposal there are
> >>>
> >>> org.apache.cocoon.matcher
> >>> org.apache.cocoon.transformer
> >>> org.apache.cocoon.chooser
> >>> org.apache.cocoon.serializer
> >>>
> >>> but
> >>> org.apache.cocoon.generators
> >>>
> >>> in pluralis...
> >>> Inconsistent. Personally I would prefer the pluralis (with s) on all
of
> >>> them, but I think all agree that mixing should not be used.
> >>
> >> Agreed.
> >>
> >> Ok, guys, vote: singular or plural?
> >>
> >> I don't care.
> >
> >
> > Single. the package may contain matchers, plural, but the object is of
type
> > matcher. period.
>
> Jeez, that was emphatic :) Sorry, I meant, I don't believe there is an
> arguement from semantics that contradicts the observation that the object
> type is singular, though the package may contain many of the type . . .
>
> --
> Mark (Poetaster) Washeim
>
> 'On the linen wrappings of certain mummified remains
> found near the Etrurian coast are invaluable writings
> that await translation.
>
> Quem colorem habet sapientia?'
>
> Evan S. Connell
>
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message