On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 12:32:11PM -0700, William R Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A module called Convert::CD should handle _all_ known different formats,
> > so I suggest a more specific name like
I am sorry, but that's completely backwards... if you always ask for
complete modules you will never be able to get one, as modules aren't born
perfectly. A module can aim for something (in this case, handle all known
formats), but that's simply impossible, if only because your definition of
"known" might differ from soembody elses, so such a requirement is simply
not fulfillable, and so no module with these properties will show up.
I really *do* have a problem with "A module called xyz *should* support
blabla", especially when "blabla" is something completely unreasonable as
the above.
> I agree, but I take it farther: CD by itself is too vague.
Well, it obviously isn't too vague, because people implicitly assumed the
right thing...
> CDROM or Audio CD's? Or what about other things that are abbreviated
> CD (such as Certificate of Deposit)?
>
> I think more information about this module should be provided in order
> to be able to suggest a better place for it...
Indeed it was too unclear. However, any more specific name would be wrong,
since it handles audio cd's, cd-r and lots of other formats. Even formats
who aren't single images of cd's should be handled.
Also, you already assume that Convert::CD is a bad name, but I can't see
any arguments in favour of that.
> > Convert::CD::Image or so, giving enough space for further additional
> > modules.
That's not really logical to me. Convert::CD is a module name, not a
namespace.. there is lots of space below Convert::CD, and down the path of
LinuxPosixWin32Mac::Convert::Data::CD::Image::Track lies definite madness.
Also, Convert::CD::Image doesn't help at all, the same argument would
apply to that, and with every iteration the module name would become less
correct.
An alternative would be a new toplevel namepsace and a new category, as
the existing "Archiving" etc. category doesn't completely match.
> CD (such as Certificate of Deposit)?
Anybody who thinks about certificate of deposit and expects others to
deduce that from the abbreviation of Convert::CD is indeed invited to
speak up.
In any case, I can understand the concern for toplevel namespaces, but
this isn't, and the module is indeed aimed at being as general as it
implies (namely converting all sorts of things that have to do with
CDs). If another module comes up later that has the same aim (and is
better) or aims at the same namespace, then there is a problem, of course,
but that cannot be avoided by more levels of indirection, especially since
perl doesn't allow sensible package aliases, so you always have to type
the full name.
So, to convince me to change the name of the module I would need real
arguments ;)
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
