* On Wed, Feb 11 2009, Steffen Schwigon wrote:
> "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
I don't think so. Everyone calls documents-parsed-into-trees-of-objects
DOMs. There is plen
On Wednesday 11 February 2009 13:25:09 Steffen Schwigon wrote:
> "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...
Even so, the connotation of an Object Model for a Document certainly descr
Smylers 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 fo
On Wednesday 11 February 2009 11.58.02 Steffen Schwigon wrote:
> Hi!
>
> [TAP Namespace Nonproliferation Treaty]
>
> Should I name a module that represents the result of a TAP parse as
> data structure
>
> TAP::Data
>
> or
>
> TAPx::Data
>
> before I upload to CPAN?
>
> T
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!
Smylers
On 11 Feb 2009, at 13:50, Smylers wrote:
Steffen Schwigon writes:
For this purpose I need a reliable data structure that containes
parsed TAP.
TAP::Struct?
Yeah, I know "struct" is a C-ism, but it's quite well known (it has a
Wikipedia page!) and at least makes the point it's structured data
Steffen Schwigon writes:
> For this purpose I need a reliable data structure that containes
> parsed TAP.
TAP::Struct?
Yeah, I know "struct" is a C-ism, but it's quite well known (it has a
Wikipedia page!) and at least makes the point it's structured data
rather than just "data".
Smylers
- Original Message
> From: Andy Armstrong
> But, of course, Ovid is right about ::Data being a bit generic :)
Too bad that, even after Steffen's excellent description, I still don't have a
flaming clue what to call it.
Cheers,
Ovid
--
Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/c
Andy Armstrong writes:
> On 11 Feb 2009, at 12:38, Andy Armstrong wrote:
>>> There are no TAPx:: modules there except the intermediate
>>> TAPx::Parser
>>> which is now TAP::Parser. But there are some TAP:: modules. That's
>>> why
>>> I ask.
>>
>>
>> I'd say TAP::Data is absolutely fine.
>
>
> But
On 11 Feb 2009, at 12:38, Andy Armstrong wrote:
There are no TAPx:: modules there except the intermediate
TAPx::Parser
which is now TAP::Parser. But there are some TAP:: modules. That's
why
I ask.
I'd say TAP::Data is absolutely fine.
But, of course, Ovid is right about ::Data being a b
On 11 Feb 2009, at 10:58, Steffen Schwigon wrote:
Should I name a module that represents the result of a TAP parse as
data structure
TAP::Data
or
TAPx::Data
before I upload to CPAN?
There are no TAPx:: modules there except the intermediate TAPx::Parser
which is now TAP::Parser. But there ar
- Original Message
> From: Steffen Schwigon
> Hi!
>
> [TAP Namespace Nonproliferation Treaty]
>
> Should I name a module that represents the result of a TAP parse as
> data structure
>
> TAP::Data
>
> or
>
> TAPx::Data
>
> before I upload to CPAN?
>
> The
Hi!
[TAP Namespace Nonproliferation Treaty]
Should I name a module that represents the result of a TAP parse as
data structure
TAP::Data
or
TAPx::Data
before I upload to CPAN?
There are no TAPx:: modules there except the intermediate TAPx::Parser
which is now TAP::
13 matches
Mail list logo
