Smylers <smyl...@stripey.com> writes: > Andy Armstrong writes: > >> On 11 Feb 2009, at 13:50, Smylers wrote: O >> >> > TAP::Struct? >> >> +0 - in the sense that it's fine by me - but I can still imagine a >> better noun even if I can't think what it is :) > > +1 to Andy's comment on my suggestion!
Thank you all for your suggestions. I liked the "Struct" idea but came back to "Data" because I just looked "Struct" and "Data" modules on CPAN to find out about the expectation that a user might have. "Struct" modules are very often explained with their C analogy. One module (Class::MakeMethods::Template::Struct) even apologizes for being named "Struct" although it did not want to be associated this way. There are many "Data" modules that are meant similar to my one, most prominently: - Text::Graph::Data - GD::Graph::Data - Audio::Data - SOAP::Data - File::Data and many with using "Data" to refer to handle Perl data structures: - Data::Walk - Data::Filter - Data::Serializer - Data::Classifier - Data::DPath Finally to comment on Nadim's suggestion: "TAP::DOM" is a nice idea. Thank you, too. But although DOM isn't strictly associated to XML, most people would probably have this connotation in mind (wow, maybe I call it "::MIND", with recursive meaning "Mind Is Not DOM". :-) Summary: Again, I think that "TAP::Data" could quite fit the expectation of a typical CPAN user. Although I will still wait a bit for some last minute "OH NOES". Thanks. Kind regards, Steffen -- Steffen Schwigon <s...@renormalist.net> Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/> German Perl-Workshop 2009 <http://www.perl-workshop.de/en/2009>
