From: Sandro Hawke ([email protected])
Date: 06/25/04
> >This might be a good reason in some cases, but I don't see how it helps at
> >all for names of variables.
>
> I don't think variable names is one of the places where it's most crucial
> to be extensible.
> I was addressing the general point. That said...
> Wrt names, more generally (e.g., predicate names), suppose one decided
> later to have multiple parts/aspects to the name,
> e.g., an additional prefix name cf. namespaces or Prolog modules, or local
> name and global name, etc.
> It's easy to make a name an element (instead of an attribute) in the
> design, so why not;
> to do so preserves flexibility at little or no cost.
...
> As go names in general, why not be uniform in the design and treat variable
> names in a similar fashion.
Another reason I've heard is to allow language markup, eg to support
screen readers. The variable name "channel" would be pronounced by
text-to-speech software quite differently if language-tagged "fr" vs
"en".
It seems far-fetched to me to imagine this mattering very much for
SWRL [wouldn't you want the names pronouned in your language anyway,
or something?], but it is a non-dart reason I've heard.
-- sandro
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 06/25/04 EST