On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 00:08 -0200, Fernando Correa Neto wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:05 AM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> wrote:
>> > While it seems people generally agree that some change is required here,
>> > it also seems there are a good number of people who don't like
>> > "resource". Here are the arguments against it:
>> >
>> > - we're just switching one overloaded term ("model") for another
>> > ("resource"). Zope people tend to think of static files when they
>> > think of "resource", Pylons folks already have confusion about
>> > "resource" due to map.resource and other usages.
>> >
>> > - Only the entire url represents a resource. Because
>> > http://example.com/foo/bar is a valid resource does not mean that
>> > http://example.com/foo is. Implying each segment is a resource would
>> > be confusing.
>> >
>> > Alternate suggestions:
>> >
>> > - "traversal model"
>>
>> If it's an object graph, would "traversable" be bad? I know it sounds
>> very zopish but, it is actually a traversable model.
>
> "A traversable is an object in a graph.." adjectives don't make great
> nouns, I'm afraid.
Well, I forgot it was all about semantics.
Node graph makes more sense then.
-Fernando
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-de...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
pylons-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.
