16 Nov
2010
16 Nov
'10
5:16 p.m.
This is why you can get a little explanation beside the acronym
Do you prefer
Moose or SotwareAnalysisPlatform
Glamour or BrowserFlowFramework
Pier or SeasideAppllicationCMS
Seaside or dynamicWebFramework
Citizen or the fuckingLibToParseBibUglyEntries....
Mondrian or theDrawingAPIToOnlyDrawBoxesAndArrows
I prefer the first. So let us be a bit clever. Have nice name and explanation.
look at VW they have VisualWorks Web Server.... I proposed them to call it Sioux long
time ago (because of blackfoot (smart guys), Apache, ....).
Stef
On Nov 16, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
A name that is not an explanation makes it hard for the user to know what the thing is or
does. I have many problems with the Moose / Pharo / Squeak / ... community in this
respect: I am sure there are a lot of cool tools and technolgies out there, and I see
names flying around but I have no idea what they are.
Apache gets away with it because it is world famous. Once your tool is world famous the
name does not matter anymore.
OK name your stuff how you want but in that case the community should also put a glossary
online so that people like me can find their way.
On 16 Nov 2010, at 11:16, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
why?
a name is not an explanation.
Ava: an XML parser
So for me I repeat is XML support is a bad name.
Look at Comanche, Apache
why apache is not called HTTPServer?
Stef
--
Johan Fabry
jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev