- From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 23:52:54 +0200
- To: <rhm@cdepot.net>, <jimbobbs@hotmail.com>, "'Bill de hÓra'" <dehora@eircom.net>, "'Sean B. Palmer'" <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Just one observation -- all of the attempts to improve readability have > used the same strategy: replacing *long* names by *short* names. > That strategy takes into account the fact that humans can only absorb > so much at one time, and *shorter is better*. If you're not a Visual Basic expert then dbgrdQueryResult [1] will probably be meaningless, whereas some sense can be made of the much longer dataBoundGridQueryResult. The amount and type of meaning that is required is also important - you probably don't/shouldn't need to know the type of the object in practice, so queryResult is probably more appropriate. Yes, this is shorter, but then so is qr or even x. In general I suppose it depends a lot on how familiar the symbol is - the XML acronym whizzes by in a way that Extensible Markup Language doesn't (I even had to pause there to remember the spelling). The positional pattern of most triples syntaxes is pretty immediately recognisable : blah blah blah, <blah> <blah> "blah". or even blah(blah, blah). Tim Bray's RPV looked hard work to me, in fact it seemed worse than RDF/XML. Cheers, Danny. [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vbcon98/htm l/vbconobjectnamingconventions.asp (not for those with sensitive dispositions)
Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 17:56:43 UTC