On 23/05/2013 13:17, Cheetham, Anastasia wrote:
Antranig, this is an interesting topic. Naming can be a tricky thing; thinking
about the issues you raise
has really got me pondering.
Here are some stream-of-conciousness thoughts: Some opinions, some musings,
some questions…
First, Antranig, some of the points in your email brought to mind the
discussions started in the thread
"Designing a new UIO API." In that thread, you pointed out that we don't want
to somehow elevate the
out-of-the-box set of panels and settings to any privileged status. You also
said
We anticipate that in real life, almost ALL practical uses of UIO will be in
the scenarios labelled
under the headings "adding settings" and "removing settings".
These points make a lot of sense to me. Combine them with the information in
this email, and it seems
that the natural, un-altered state of the components is: empty. I'm inclined to
refer to the "natural,
un-altered state of the components" as the "default" state.
But if we use "default" in our naming of the empty components, how then do we
refer to the set of
out-of-the-box panels and settings? "outOfTheBox"? "builtIn"? "starter"?
"basic"?
Should we even be referring to them as a set at all? Correct me if I'm wrong,
but I imagine there will be
use-cases where integrators might want to use *some* of the out-of-the-box
settings but not others.
Perhaps there should be no single grade that adds all of them, but rather
separate grades for each?
(Personally, I think we *should* have a single grade that adds all the
out-of-the-box settings in one go
– and not require six separate grades – but I could probably be convinced
otherwise by good arguments.)
Thanks for these remarks, Anastasia. In answer to the last questions - we don't have an alternative to have
names for the separate grades as well as the since grade which combine them for user convenience. If the
separate grades didn't have names, they couldn't exist :) "outOfTheBox" seems to be our current de facto
alternative to "default", and I think words like "builtIn" are prejudicial by virtue of the previous
argument suggesting "privilege for the 1st parties" - clearly these grades are NOT actually "built in" as we
established.
I'm not particularly excited about any of the words on offer, so calling on the community for some fresh
brainstorming! Perhaps we can have a chat in IRC tomorrow -
Cheers,
A
_______________________________________________________
fluid-work mailing list - [email protected]
To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
