>>>>> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 22:55:24 -0800 (PST), Nick Tonkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Normally I would call the module Weather::Marine::BuoyData or something > like that. > But I see that there is (a) no top level Weather.pm and (b) the > only module in Weather:: is Weather::Underground, a screen-scraper that > parses wunderground.com ... > I also see that there are several weather-related modules under > Geo:: (which seems a little obscure in itself), but with no apparent > naming convention. There's: > Geo::METAR > Geo::StormTracker::* > etc., but also > Geo::Weather # screen-scraper for weather.com > Geo::WeatherNOAA # screen-scraper for nws.noaa.gov > So: Should I go with Weather::Marine::BuoyData (since Weather:: has been > created already) or Geo::Weather::Marine::BuoyData (since that's where > most wether modules are)? Not only are most weather modules under Geo::, they have even been there since 1998. The root namespace Weather was taken in 2001 by a single module author. Unless there is a compelling reason to turn away from Geo::, I'd suggest staying there. > (I would really like to take a broom to this area of CPAN and get > everything organized into a rational namespace hierarchy, but I guess > that's not going to happen.) It usually does not happen because all authors legitimately claim that they cannot change their namespace because the modules already have so many users. But of course, if you want to champion a Weather:: namespace and give clear directions for future development and set up a mailing list for weather-related modules and commit to it for a couple of years, then this would be a Good Thing. -- andreas
