On Saturday, February 7, 2004, at 12:46 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
I shudder at the thought, but is it worthwhile to arrive at a set of
conventions for naming common metadata properties? It would likely be a
long and tedious discussion, but we might have greater interoperability of
components if we did.
I was looking to see if there was already something out there, some tradition the old-timers might know about. Or maybe something somebody has already made up.
If what I use either matches common practice or common practice happens to follow what I do, I benefit for lots of reasons. One might be that it increases the chance that the IDE might become smart along this line.
I'm think of things like version, copyright, publication date, and for
libraries a list of exposed commands and functions, possibly with
descriptions like AppleScript. As Rev grows there will be greater
opportunities for commercial libraries, so having a common way for other
components to know what's there would allow a script to be locked yet still
be useful (a true black box).
There are lots of directions for libraries. Issues might include named interfaces vs command list. There is also the other direction concerning the required libraries.
That is one of the reasons my question was directed to a few simple things that would be common among objects.
Also, folks might join a bandwagon in a few simple tags but might flinch at an elaborate library description.
Even so, it might be possible to start out with a simple set, and then for libraries add a small set and then a more elaborate set. Folks who want to participate may at any level. Sets that turn out to have little use or are too much trouble will wither away. Maybe it would be nice to refer to these by name, perhaps formally.
I got to this point because of my interest in custom controls. The same kinds of issues may apply in common practice there.
Dar Scott
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
