On Feb 13, 2015, at 14:58, Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com> wrote: So should we really rename ComposableModel to ComposableUIModel ? (And before Spec becomes more widely used?)
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 1:47 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 13 Feb 2015, at 18:29, Johan Fabry <jfa...@dcc.uchile.cl> wrote: > > > If we think about renaming things in Spec, actually I’d rename: > - ComposableModel to ComposableUI > > - all the protocols ‘protocol-*’ to ‘API-*’ > > > +100 > I’m super tired of “protocol” category (it is actually a protocol… as any > other category under the “protocol” pane :P) > api is a lot better > Lets do it! If you recognize in yourself that feeling of "tension"between doing what is right, and the effort to do it - then we should do what is right. So can we first decide that we should and _will_ do something, and then have some debate to finalise the actual term. I proposed ComposableUIModel, but ComposableUI sounds fine, maybe better. And at the same time, are there any other Spec classes that should follow the same philosphy? We should make such change a one-time spoon of medicine! cheers -ben
