On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 01:23 -0700, Diwaker Gupta wrote: > > Diwaker asked me once about the naming conventions the contracts should > > follow. I believe I never gave you an answer. > > no problemas :)
:) > > > Now leather-dev is based on this contracts. I reckon you can remember > > the discussion about leather/scale-dev where we agreed that the designer > > needs design hooks (absolute positioning is too limiting). ...and the > > work on views finally started. ;-) > > I agree. However, I think we should clearly identify *who* is it that > we are targeting the contracts for? Note that the end-user never knows > about contracts. It is the skin designer who has to know the > contracts. I am with you in setting up a standard for naming > conventions, but I think the naming should reflect the content *in > context* of the designer. You are right. > > > For example I want to rename "pdf-link" to "content-pdf" because it > > describes better the functionality of the contract. Now writing this > > line I realized that "content-main-pdf" would describe this contract > > even better, because the outcome pressing the link will be the main > > content in pdf-format. > > To make my point clear, consider the same pdf-link example. As a skin > designer, I need to know what this contract will do for me. Now this > particular contract will put a _link_ to the _pdf_. When I'm designing > the skin, that is more important to me, than knowing that when the > link is pressed, the main content opens up in PDF -- that is something > for the end-user. > > So IMHO, pdf-link is actually a good name, because it says exactly > what it does -- "if you include me in your view, i will output a link > to the pdf" > I agree again with a small addition. The idea is that contracts are within groups: - branding - nav - search - content - siteinfo That makes it easier to group the contracts by this functionalities and adding new contracts based on the above mentioned categories. Using your input I recommend: content-pdf-link The advantage I see is that the designer nows that he can choose from this categories and directly knows what kind of contract he will get in return. I do not know whether I can explain it right, keep on throwing your thoughts. > > I need some input about renaming the contracts to follow the simple rule > > "contract name expresses the functional output of the contract" > > Precisely. The "pdf-link" contract's functionality is generating a > link to the pdf. Just my 2 cents :) > :) ...as skin designer I reckon it would be better to know: The "content-pdf-link" contract's functionality is generating a link to the content in pdf. > But I'm not too picky about names. If there is a consensus on any one > naming scheme, I'm mostly fine with it. > Nothing is written in stone yet, we are still <1.0 and we need a continuous development on this scheme. salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
