[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perl Authors Upload Server) writes:
> rationale:
>
> Speech::Recognizer is a lame name. Speech::Recognition would be
> considerably better. If you disagree, I can change my module to use
> the already establish naming hierarchy. I have already created
> Speech::Recognition::ViaVoice. It's in my upload space.
Thank you for your civil and constructive criticism :/
I'm not wedded to 'Recognizer', it was just chosen by analogy to the
existing Speech::Synthesiser (except that, uh, I spelled it wrong, or
something).
'Recognition' at least avoids the inevitable flamage from people on
one or the other side of the Atlantic who feel that their spelling is
the One True Way.
I wish you'd given a better explanation than just "lame". I think
Speech::Recognizer is a fine name; ViaVoice and Sphinx-II are both
speech recognizers. (please do not waste electrons by saying "but
`recognizer' isn't a word!" or similar pedantries). Also, if the
modules were object-oriented (which they aren't, but which they might
become in the future), it would certainly look better to say:
my $spx = new Speech::Recognizer::SPX;
than:
my $spx = new Speech::Recognition::SPX;
Though I do admit that:
use Speech::Recognition;
sounds rather good. (If there were a common interface to different
speech recognizers, this might be a good name for it)
I would, however, like to get an outside opinion on the appropriate
namespace. The tone of your message quoted above does not predispose
me to cooperation but it's more important for the naming scheme to be
consistent than aesthetically/semantically ideal...
