Are we keeping the 5.2 names in 5.3 as well or is the proposal that 5.2 apps get rewritten for 5.3?
I don't really see the need to make changes for 5.3 for the sake of satisfying this particular naming convention. For php 6, it can make sense given the other changes being required. tex > -----Original Message----- > From: Norbert Lindenberg ☮ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 11:34 PM > To: Guillaume Rossolini > Cc: Norbert Lindenberg ☮; Darren Cook; Stanislav Malyshev; > php-i18n@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-I18N] intl 1.0.0RC1 > > I like Guillaume's proposal - use Collator and Locale as is > for 5.2, make them Intl::Collator and Intl::Locale when > namespaces are available, i.e., from 5.3. > > Would that work for everybody? How much effort is it to > implement this? > > Norbert > > > On Jun 10, 2008, at 02:44 , Guillaume Rossolini wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Here's my user point of view, if you don't mind. > > > > I think your argument is about namespaces, which will be in > 6 but not > > 5.2... So you might want to have IntCollator and IntLocale > in 5.2 to > > avoid possible collisions, but you would rather have something like > > Intl::Collator and Intl::Locale from 5.3 and 6 onward. I guess the > > question is: > > can you > > bear with Collator and Locale until we have namespaces? I > know I can. > > > > Guillaume Rossolini > > > > ------------------------------------- > Norbert Lindenberg > Yahoo! Internationalization Architect > > > > -- > PHP Unicode & I18N Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To > unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
