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