I am not convinced of this.  As I read it, the developer using CGI::Tooltip
needs no Javascript knowledge; I think I would see CGI::Javascript::Tooltip
and immediately exclude it as I have no knowledge of Javascript.  It should
be made clear in the docs of the module that javascript is required at the
client end, but clearly tooltips are meaningless without a gui, and very few
GUI browsers are not javascript-enabled.  I'm all for meaningful names, but
they don't have to carry all the documentation in one line.

Becky, this seems to me to be a very useful module.

Mx.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: khemir nadim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 11:25 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: New module: CGI::Tooltip
>
>
>I think it would be appropriate to further catalogue the 
>module name under "Java" or the name od the specific library 
>you interface with.
>
>"Becky Alcorn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> We're looking at releasing our new module CGI::Tooltip onto CPAN.  
>> This module provides a simple perl interface to Walter Zorn's elegant
>Javascript
>> tooltip library (http://www.walterzorn.com/tooltip/tooltip_e.htm).  
>> This library provides a flexible way of adding good looking tooltips 
>> (onmouseovers or popup boxes) to web pages.  How appropriate is the 
>> name CGI::Tooltip?
>>
>> Regards
>> Becky
>>
>
>

Reply via email to