<HTML><BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 13:47:48 +0000, Paul Makepeace wrote:<BR>
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Nigel Hamilton<BR>
> <<a href="mailto:nigel@turbo10.com">nigel@turbo10.com</a>> wrote: <BR>
<BR>
[Shouldn't there be some more attributions here? Naughty Nigel!]<BR>
<BR>
> >> > How about Essential:: or Essence:: ? The problem with adding<BR>
> >> > something to the end is that you might conflict with the<BR>
> >> > original module's naming scheme. By contrast, starting a new<BR>
> >> > top-level namespace makes the project look more cohesive, and<BR>
> >> > provides an obvious location for the core philosophy.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> A good point. Linguistically, of course, it should be<BR>
> >> EssentialsOf:: - after all, you would talk about "the essentials<BR>
> >> of CPAN.pm" and "the CPAN.pm essentials".<BR>
<BR>
It would be a rare exception among names usually picked to reflect<BR>
hierarchy rather than to read like English. After all, would you<BR>
rather use Class::DBI or ClassConstructorUsing::DBI? (I haven't used<BR>
it at all, so this may be not an accurate reflection of what it<BR>
actually does).<BR>
<BR>
That said, I did suggest Essential:: instead of Essentials:: because<BR>
it would read nicely. It also has a nice double meaning suitable for<BR>
this project.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > OK. So it sounds like there should be a top-level name space - I'm<BR>
> > just not sure about the length of 'EssentialsOf' .... I initially<BR>
> > started with - atomic, nano (i.e., smaller than tiny), uno (for<BR>
> > one method only - probably not doable)<BR>
<BR>
Of those, atomic is the best. It's nice and short, and does capture<BR>
the intent to some extent, but I don't think it's close enough, and<BR>
could easily be misread as relating to physics rather than<BR>
kickstarting development.<BR>
<BR>
> > or you could go for an acronym ...<BR>
> ><BR>
> > EOF - essentials of?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > EOF::DBIx::Simple<BR>
> > EOF::Template::Simple<BR>
> > Eof::DBIx::Simple<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Hmmm - not sure ... it's slightly overloaded with end of file.<BR>
<BR>
And it violates the "don't make me think" principle.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > I'd like to keep the prefix short so it acts more like a<BR>
> > pointer ...<BR>
><BR>
> Use Gist. It's a great word: short, to the point, and exactly<BR>
> conveys what you're trying to do. If someone doesn't know what a<BR>
> word means, they can use a dictionary. Perl has never been about<BR>
> dumbing down use of language!<BR>
<BR>
I'm in almost in complete agreement, except for "don't make me think"<BR>
again. We all know what "gist" means, but someone searching CPAN<BR>
seeing these names for the first time may not make the connection<BR>
we're looking for. It is the shortest meaningful name though. A quick<BR>
look in the thesaurus only supplies longer words:<BR>
* Crucial<BR>
* Elemental, Elementary<BR>
* Fundamental, Fundament/s<BR>
* Innate<BR>
<BR>
-- <BR>
Peter Haworth pmh@edison.ioppublishing.com<BR>
"Sometimes I wonder if I wouldn't have been better off creating<BR>
a cult of forbidden secrets instead of a computer company."<BR>
-- <a href="http://ubersoft.net/d/20030602.html" target="_blank">http://ubersoft.net/d/20030602.html</a> <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<span style="font-family:Arial; Font-size:10.0pt">
<hr width="100%">
This email (and attachments) are confidential and intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender, delete any copies and do not take action in reliance on it. Any views expressed are the author's and do not represent those of IOP, except where specifically stated. IOP takes reasonable precautions to protect against viruses but accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from virus infection. For the protection of IOP's systems and staff emails are scanned automatically.”
<br><br>
Institute of Physics Registered in England under Registration No 293851 <br>
Registered Office: 76/78 Portland Place, London W1B 1NT <br>
<hr width="100%"></span>
</BODY></HTML>