+1 for sbx
And what about "thk" or "tmhk" for tomahawk?
Having 2, 3 or 4 character namespaces is
* Bad news for vi addicts - so sorry about that ;-)
* no problem for IDE users with "IntelliSense" or WYSIWYG Editor users
My 0.2
-Manfred
2005/8/2, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 'sbx' is exactly what i was thinking about. In english 'ts' has a
> certain meaning though ('tough shit') which is a unsympathetic way to
> say 'If you don't like it too bad for you.' ;-)
>
> sean
>
> On 8/2/05, Bruno Aranda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 0.5
> > After all that time using the 'x', changing to 't' is a big change as
> > we all have got used to 'x'. The massive replace is needed, and
> > existing production applications could change progressively from 'x'
> > to 't' as the prefix is defined in each page. I do agree that it is
> > more natural to use the 't' now that the components+extensions
> > subproject it is called tomahawk and for new users the 't' might be
> > more understandable than an x. Also, what Dennis points out has been
> > said some times in the past and it is not the first time the 'x'
> > debate is started....
> > Maybe for the sandbox we could use a 2 or 3-letter prefix, such as
> > 'sx' (then the 'x' would have more sense for the Xtensions) or 'sbx'.
> > Or maybe 'ts' (tomahawk sandbox)...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bruno
> >
> > 2005/8/2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > > From a user's perspective, I felt slightly jilted by the 'x' because that
> > > is
> > > what I and everyone else have always used for the JSTL XML taglib - which
> > > is
> > > pretty popular, and to my knowledge, "claimed it" first.
> > >
> > > Dennis Byrne
> > >
> >
>
