Hi Dennis, I am myself also a bit lost on the countless names that I tried out in the > implementation, but I think I had toHumanFriendlyString() and > toDisplayFriendlyString() methods at some point. These then ended up being > toString() and toDisplayString() after some iterations. I would be ok with > renaming getHost() and toString() so that their names suggest they don't > use IDNA, but I'd clearly need a good enough suggestion, since neither > "MachineFriendly", nor "NonDisplayable" sound like the best alternative for > me. I was also considering using getIdnaHost() and toIdnaString(), but I > realized these are the worst looking names I have come up with so far. >
What about getPunycodeHost(), getUnicodeHost(), toPunycodeString(), toUnicodeString()? Or getAsciiHost() and toAsciiString() may also work. These are the best names I managed to come up with so far. In the meantime, I renamed RFC 3986's toString() methods too according to another suggestion: - toString() became toRawString() - toNormalizedString() became toString() The new names mirror exactly what their getter counterparts do. Máté >
