This has been one of the best examples I've seen on the difficulties of
module naming. Many of the suggestions have valid reasons, and precidence
to back up the theory.
Seems like a really good example of a module that could benifit from meta
data, and multi-category placement. If it weren't for existing categories,
and still needed a category structure, I'd personally think something like
the following would be more suitable:
UI::ToolTip
With UI::ToolTip::HTML::JavaScript implementing a UI::ToolTip class.
It seems that the problem is that you could have ToolTip's implemented for
an HTML, or SVG, or Java, or GTK, or whatever type of display toolkit, and
they could be implemented using some other technology like JavaScript,
CSS, etc. Personally, I'm more a fan of listing the interface the tooltip
applies to first. If I were looking for a ToolTip module for GTK, I'd
expect to find GTK::ToolTip or ToolTip::GTK, not Python::ToolTip::GTK or
JavaScript::ToolTip::GTK.
But, to each his own.
This has been an interesting thread. My vote's for "HTML::ToolTip". If
possible, it'd be nice if it was an abstract class, and
HTML::ToolTip::Javascript was an implementation of that class.
--
Josh I.
