On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Magesh Umasankar wrote: +1 for all your proposals !
Costin > > * Do not deprecate existing attribute names just for the sake > of aesthetics when adding new names meant to represent > existing attribute names. > > +1 from me. > > * Each alaised name should live in harmony with its 'aliasees'. > > +1 from me. > > * We call it a feature and let the user pick the attribute name that > most suits her taste. > > +1 from me. > > * We undeprecate all the renamings we have done > so far. > > +1 from me. > > * Let us face it: Given our track record, 6 months down the > line, we are going to come up with a newer, aesthetically > better standard. So all we can do now is We do not commit > any name we don't see as the *current* naming standard. > > +1 from me. > > > > > Pete > > > > Cheers, > Magesh > > ********************************************** > * Etc.: A sign to make others believe that * > * you know more than you actually do. * > ********************************************** > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
