Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators
9,842
edits
Talk:Namespaces: Difference between revisions
m
moved Talk:Namespace to Talk:Namespaces: plural as we need to use this article to focus the refining of the namespaces for implementation phase
(verbs as namespaces are the only sensible long-term thing, since you divide namespaces based on the fact that you DO different things with what is contained in that namespace) |
m (moved Talk:Namespace to Talk:Namespaces: plural as we need to use this article to focus the refining of the namespaces for implementation phase) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Using '''verbs''' for namespaces just isn't something we are going to do; It just messes the mental coherence of what is the role and meaning of article names in the main namespace and in the other namespaces. | Using '''verbs''' for namespaces just isn't something we are going to do; It just messes the mental coherence of what is the role and meaning of article names in the main namespace and in the other namespaces. | ||
'''Namespaces must be nouns''' | ::Sorry, you are wrong. You are trying to impose object-oriented programming nonsense beliefs on what is obviously and only a structured or functional type of problem. A very few types of data items (company/manufacturer, service/product, region/country - see [[intermediate page]]) must be processed very deeply by a number of processes that "Develop" the system, "Research" the sources, and "Publish" the final conclusions. It is a simple pipeline. In every such functional project the namespace is verb-first, so this assertion is WRONG: | ||
"'''Namespaces must be nouns'''" | |||
I could consider changing the project-namespace to "Development:", but I'd say that "Consudev:" is a good solution: | I could consider changing the project-namespace to "Development:", but I'd say that "Consudev:" is a good solution: | ||
| Line 55: | Line 57: | ||
::A god-awful alternative is to use horrible standard abbreviations like "dev:" and "pub:" but this is just too awful to think about. | ::A god-awful alternative is to use horrible standard abbreviations like "dev:" and "pub:" but this is just too awful to think about. | ||
== Code: == | |||
[[Control verb]] suggests that a [[code:namespace]] should be created to hold code. That would suggest that a good name for [[Develop:namespace]] would then be just [[Code_talk:]] ! | |||