- From: Matthew D. Fuller <fullermd@over-yonder.net>
- Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 15:10:32 -0600
- To: Dave Hodder <dmh@dmh.org.uk>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 03:24:50PM +0000 I heard the voice of
Dave Hodder, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Heh. On a similiar note, different XML-based languages seem to adopt
> different practise with element names made up of several words. Some
> use <quiteLongElementName/> (e.g. XForms) whilst others go for
> <quite-long-element-name/> (e.g. XSLT). Why, I wonder, is there no
> stand practise within the W3C?
That can probably be traced back to the same dichotomy in programmers,
too.
Personally, I despise aLongFunctionName(), and much prefer
a_long_function_name(). But I know I've run into troubles with
underscores in SGML, so I can only presume it's the same in XML.
--
Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net
Unix Systems Administrator | fullermd@futuresouth.com
Specializing in FreeBSD | http://www.over-yonder.net/
"The only reason I'm burning my candle at both ends, is because I
haven't figured out how to light the middle yet"
Received on Sunday, 24 February 2002 16:10:49 UTC