[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [stellation-res] New repository API checked in
|
Makes sense to me.
- Jim
At 04:21 PM 10/22/2003, Mark C. Chu-Carroll wrote:
On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, at 02:08 PM, Jonathan Gossage wrote:
At worst though you might have to fully qualify our names or the Eclipse
names in an environment where they conflicted. We don't want the names to
get too long or we will compromise readability in the normal case.
I agree. I'm trying to use class names that match with the corresponding
WVCM names
when they represent the same conceptual entity. That way we've got one
vocabulary: the
vocabulary of WVCM expanded by some Stellation-specific terms. I don't want to
wind up with one vocabulary for Stellation, and a totally different one for
WVCM. It's just going to get too confusing.
So if we need to explicitly qualify our resource types, I think that's
better than
the alternatives.
-Mark
Regards
Jonathan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Wright - IBM Research" <jwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <stellation-res@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <stellation-res@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [stellation-res] New repository API checked in
At 01:38 PM 10/22/2003, Mark C. Chu-Carroll wrote:
OK, in my local copy, I've changed the conflicting names. Instead of just
adding
"Stell" to the names, I tried to expand the names to make them more
informative
when there was a good choice. Here's what I would up with:
- IPath -> IResourcePath
- IResource -> IResourceVersion
- IProject -> IStellProject
I'll check this in with the next version.
Thanks. It's good to make the names more meaningful.
I'm still a bit nervous about IResourceAnything; Eclipse has a lot of
IResourceXXX
interfaces, and may well add more in future.
