On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 11:55:33 -0500, Thompson, Steve wrote:
>
>However, systems that are built based on prior functioning code and
>ideas of how things should be done, now get the shaft because we now
>take it that ONE IS SHOUTING BY USING ALL UPPER CASE AS IT USED TO BE.
>
>IN FACT, MIXED CASE IS A NEW CONSTRUCT. HOW MANY WRITTEN LANGUAGES HAD
>MIXED CASE PRIOR TO 1400 AD/CE?
>
Greek?
>Get over it. Or go buy your own cheese to go with the w[h]ine.
>
You seem to be the one whining about 600 years of tradition.
Do you really want to go back to the conventions of 1400?
Why didn't you submit your entire message in upper case?
The answer comes down to social pressure. And that pressure
requires that modern anglophones be addressed in mixed case.
I might grant that programming languages can be very successful
in a single case. But nowadays the clientele demands the
prevalent typographical conventions, for data at least. But
it's often difficult to isolate data from code.
It's generally welcomed that HLASM treats as equivalent:
DC C'Steve Thompson'
and
dc c'Steve Thompson'
but different from:
DC C'STEVE THOMPSON'
But I consider it a disservice that "dsn(*)" forces upper
case. That's text data, not code.
-- gil
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
