On 13.10.2016 16:08, Bastien Montagne wrote:
> I closed it, since there is no bug here really, this is more like 'how things
> work currently', and 'do we want/need to make those shown names longer in UI'
> question.


> Le 13/10/2016 à 05:21, emcéjé a écrit :
>> I understood the logic behind using '...', but that is for people who do
>> not use well-organized naming procedures (what is a requirement for team
>> work or for creating asset packs).

"Systems of naming" are closely related to scopes and scoping.
When a system or a language lacks a proper scoping construct,
people resort to establishing a naming convention.

For example, in C programming, you'll frequently encounter
naming conventions for functions like

<APPLICATION>_<NAMESPACE>_<OBJECT>_<verb>(this, arguments...)

In *actual usage context*, 90% of the time in fact you only need
to know the innermost component of such a scheme, because the
rest is obvious from the context (scope).

For example, when you're working with an object/mesh in Blender,
it's sufficient so see the material names "brass", and "glass"
and "stone". Because at that point, this is just a reminder
of a decision already taken.

But when you're browsing a collection of materials, you need
to distinguish the various kinds of glass, and the flavours
of brass and the like.


For me, this pretty much sounds like a topic to address in Blender-2.8,
since it is very closely related to sharing and referring, linking
and overlays. What kind of description do we want to show for an
material which actually belongs to a material library?

-- Ichthyo

_______________________________________________
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers

Reply via email to