Le mardi 2 octobre 2007, Dennis Nienhüser a écrit : > Rafael Fernández López schrieb: > > Hi all, > > > > On aKademy 2007 at Glasgow I had a very nice talk with Duncan (Kopete > > project founder), and we were discussing about the term "Metacontact". > > > > We wanted to focus Kopete to persons. Probably Metacontact is a > > not-intuitive way of referring to a person (a person with different > > accounts yeah, but a person). > > > > The word "Metacontact" in this context is probably not needed, and we > > could rename it to something else, as I said to focus it more to > > "Persons". > > Any reason against naming it "Person" then? Technically we have > metacontacts that are linked to addressbook entries, and accounts > belonging to exactly one metacontact. Conceptually, the technical thing > "metacontact" is a person which ideally already exists in my addressbook. > > I wouldn't name it "User" though, as this term is often not only used > for the person itself, but also their accounts.
Eh, great topics :-) I've heard one user call it "Super Contact". I liked the name, but this doesn't represent really what is it. IMO "MetaContact" should probably renamed simply "Contact", as it is the term used in KAddressBook AFAIK But the question is now: But how to call the subcontacts ? "Account" is already taken by the user account. In fact, why not call it "Address" ? yes, subcontact are only object contact for the protocol code. But in fact, for the user, they are just addresse of the metacontact.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ kopete-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
