On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:47:35PM -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Do our customers want or need that string class?
I'm slightly uncomfortable with this question. The strongest message we keep getting is, "Aargh. Can't you keep these internationalization questions away from me?" The _second_ strongest message we keep getting is, "Aargh. I need that [disallowed thing]." Our answer seems to be, increasingly, "Here is a framework for you to subclass this giant set of trade-offs." But that wasn't what the customers wanted. What they wanted was something that was easy and also totally flexible. We have to deliver a nicely-packaged gumdrop of, "Can't have that. Here's what you can have." It increasingly seems to me that we need to offer easy and flexible classes; maybe Name and Free is it. But I'd like to be able to offer a SlightlyFree that doesn't present quite so many subclassing opportunities. The people who want precis don't want to have to subclass. Yes, I know this is inconsistent with part of what I was arguing in Paris, but I thought about it more, and I am even less settled than I was then. A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] _______________________________________________ precis mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/precis
