Straw poll: Do we want to capitalize datatypes such as hydra:rfc6570Template? (ISSUE-17)

• From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
• Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:09:18 +0100
• To: "'Hydra'" <public-hydra@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <080001d02b8f$bfebe550$3fc3aff0$@gmx.net>

Hi all,

I'd like to get a feeling of where the group stands regarding the issue of the capitalization of datatypes such as our RFC 6570 type. We have three options, each with pros and cons:

- hydra:rfc6570Template
  - Pros: somewhat consistent with the widely used XSD datatypes
  - Cons: even XSD isn't consistent with this, Schema.org uses uppercase

- hydra:Rfc6570Template
  - Pros: Easier to read than all-uppercase, matches Schema.org, perhaps
    more intuitive (classes are types as well and uppercased), consistent with
    IriTemplate & ApiDocumentation
  - Cons: in this specific case, the acronym's capitalization might be surprising

- hydra:RFC6570Template
  - Pros: acronym are normally all-uppercase (in prose, coding styles differ)
  - Cons: Inconsistent with IriTemplate, ApiDocumentation

Please add reply to this mail and add your name to the following list to express your preference:

- hydra:rfc6570Template
  - ...

- hydra:Rfc6570Template
  - Markus
  - ...

- hydra:RFC6570Template
  - ...


Thanks,
Markus


--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

Received on Thursday, 8 January 2015 22:09:40 UTC