On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 13:34, Christopher Sean Morrison <brl...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> Cliff raised a good point the other day noting that we're not doing a very
> good job consistently utilizing attribute names. These effectively become
> reserved attribute names, which Cliff has begun documenting in
> doc/docbook/system/man5/en/attributes.xml
...
> While brevity was once a tenant of our design, ambiguity is obviously bad.
> That leaves a choice of uppercase or lowercase with underscores, and
> camelCase (e.g. regionId or regionID or RegionID, etc). My inclination is to
> make attribute keys case insensitive (if they're not already) so a debate
> over upper vs. lower would be moot. This would be
Right now I read the attributes and take them as I find them (and
report unknown attributes found), but I sure like the idea of better
BRL-CAD attribute standards. How would you implement the case
insensitivity?
> Current attributes identified:
>
> region flag ('region')
> region identifier ('region_id')
> material identifier ('material_id')
Concur.
> air flag ('air')
I like "air_code" better, but I'm not going to the mat over it.
> line of sight equivalence factor ('los')
> rgb color ('rgb')
...
> shader inheritance flag ('inherit')
Concur.
> Listed in parens is the current "preferred". I suggest that we change
> oshader to shader and deprecate the (unlisted) variants.
Agree.
> More contentiously, we could prefix them all with "cad::" (e.g. cad::rgb) as
> a simple scoped naming convention on the attribute name.
I like that also. It makes clear the internal attributes versus user
attributes.
-Tom
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
BRL-CAD Developer mailing list
brlcad-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
