| Re: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] convention for class names in specs? |
|
Hi Bill,
My preference is for class names to be clearly different. It makes them easier to spot. They can, in some situations be misinterpreted as text depending on the context of the surrounding text if presented in the same font. It's no different really to syntax highlighting that we are used to from IDEs
Thanks, Mark.
From: jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <jakarta.ee-spec.committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Bill Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 17 January 2020 07:58 To: Jakarta specification committee <jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: [jakarta.ee-spec.committee] convention for class names in specs? What's our preferred convention for use of class names in spec documents?
Should class names (and other Java programming language elements) appear in a fixed width font in the document? Or should they use the same font as the surrounding text? (This is ignoring blocks of code, which I believe should always be in a fixed width font.) The "pro" is that using a fixed width font makes it clear that this is a Java class name being referred to. The "con" is that it clutters up the text making it harder to read with lots of font changes. Comments? _______________________________________________ jakarta.ee-spec.committee mailing list jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jakarta.ee-spec.committee |