How about DateTime::Usage? [was: Re: Tests failing]

[Bruce Van Allen]

On Monday, January 20, 2003, at 05:58 AM, Nick Tonkin wrote:

DateTime::Format was rejected for making it sound like you would use it to
format a date.

Dave R's first suggestion was for DateTime::Rendition (iirc -- might have
been Presentation?)

Dave's original proposal was
DateTime::Representation::... # where ... is e.g., MySQL

'Representation' is still very close to the correct *concept*, but not perfect; also kinda long, although as others have said, you don't type it out often. We're dealing with types of representations of dates. It's almost 'patterns', except that within a given parser we may have multiple 'patterns' for matching, so that might be confusing:
DateTime::Pattern:: # probably not

A concept close to pattern is form.

DateTime::Form
DateTime::Of_Form

Wait: what about Usage?
DateTime::Usage::MySQL
DateTime::Usage::ICal
DateTime::Usage::MySQL::BrailleIO
DateTime::Usage::MyOWN::Weird_Usage

DateTime::Formats could be read as a verb but not as an infinitive nor an
imperative, which are the formats :) that are used to inidcate verb-ness
in modules, imo.

How about DateTime::StringFormat ?
DateTime::Rendition
DateTime::Rendering
DateTime::Articulation
DateTime::Depiction
DateTime::Interpretation

or how about

DateTime::Structure

  - Bruce

__bruce__van_allen__santa_cruz__ca__