brian d foy wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sébastien
Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
IMHO, "Lib" doesn't carry as much information as "Raw" or even "API",
given the already existing modules.
"Raw" and "API" don't mean anything. Everything is an API :)
Yes, everything is an API, but in a sense, everything is a library as
well, depending on how you define that term. :-)
I was proposing a name ending with API to follow the Win32 / Win23API
scheme, the same way many modules now follow the "name ending with X"
scheme for "extension" modules. It's not meaningful, but it seems to
be the current convention.
"Lib" denotes the external dependency, which says much more about
the either
two, which can refer to anything.
There is (currently) no Lib:: module, while there are 78
distributions with "API" in their name. And if you check, most
actually define low-level API to external things, for things ranging
from system stuff (Win32 stuff, GSSAPI, card terminal stuff) to
documents (PDF::API2), protocols (LDAP), and of course web sites
(EVDB, Flickr, Facebook, Google).
What I'm saying is just that there seems to be a pattern. Tim may or
may not want to follow it.
--
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni
Close the world, txEn eht nepO.
