On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 08:14:41PM -0400, Amir Karger wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 10:23:53AM -0300, Garst R. Reese wrote:
> > Herbert Voss wrote:
> > >
> > > "Asger K. Alstrup Nielsen" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The 666 name is fun, but not very intuitive/informative. What about
> > > > changing it to TEX? Failing that, we should at least use ERT, which
> > > > is not very intuitive either, but at least more established?
> > >
> > > TeX is better, because it's no more like the eval red text.
> > It goes away anyway. I like the 666, maybe the same people trying to ban
> > Harry Potter will give lyx some publicity also :)
>
> Funny, but I"m going to have to agree with the others. If someone does
> happen to see an open 666 inset, this'll give them a clue as to what it
> does.
Yes, the name of program features should be primarily influenced by
clarity and intuitiveness.
Whie "666 inset" is clever and it makes sense within the sub-culture of
people who know that ERT means Evil Red Text which is a reference to TeX
mode, it fails on both clarity and intuitiveness. Too many in-jokes
and obscure references.
The "TeX inset" on the other hand, is clear and intuitive.
--
Kayvan A. Sylvan | Proud husband of | Father to my kids:
Sylvan Associates, Inc. | Laura Isabella Sylvan | Katherine Yelena (8/8/89)
http://sylvan.com/~kayvan | "crown of her husband" | Robin Gregory (2/28/92)
