Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Heikki Linnakangas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I like the "aword" name more than "lword", BTW. If we change the meaning
>> of the classes, surely we can change the name as well, right?

> I'm not very familiar with the use case here. Is there a good reason to want
> to abbreviate these names? I think I would expect "ascii", "word", and "token"
> for the three categories Tom describes.

Please look at the first nine rows of the table here:
It's not clear to me where we'd go with the names for the
hyphenated-word and hyphenated-word-part categories.  Also, ISTM that
 we should use related names for these three categories, since they are
all considered valid parts of hyphenated words.

Another point: "token" is probably unreasonably confusing as a name for
a token type.  "Is that a token token or a word token?"

Maybe "aword", "word", and "numword"?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to