Since Keith has shamed me into digging back through his original fields 
proposal, I thought I'd toss a trivial design question out there to see what 
people think.

What should our naming convention be for field types?  

  1.  alllowercase
  2.  MixedCase
  3.  mostlyMixedCase
  4.  what_eric_started_with
  5.  lukes-latest-variant

This is essentially a stylistic question, but it might help to think about 
which precedent we'd like to follow for maximum readability.  The places 
these field types are most likely to appear are:

  - in the file format
  - in the Insert Field dialog
  - in the object model used for scripting

Thus, I'm not sure whether the relevant precedent should be:

  - the Word UI
  - the RTF file format
  - conventions for various scripting languages (JavaScript, Python, etc.)

Since we're going to be changing the file format anyhow (to add field 
containers), I'd prefer that we settle this issue once to minimize future 
disruptions. 

Would someone be willing to spend a little time investigating the various 
alternatives here?  Seeding consensus with a well-researched suggestion 
would be a heck of a lot better than a mini-flame-war based on personal 
preferences. 

Thanks,
Paul




Reply via email to