> First we must arrive at something approaching consensus, which it seems we have not ;)
Yeah. We can always eventually vote on it if we won't be able to convince everyone :). But let me try again. > sort of don't really understand why we would write Dag. It seems kindof the worst of both worlds. That's not what the class is. And it doesn't really make sense as a proper noun. On top of the "owning" argument - actually I think Dag used in a sentence is way more correct than dag. PRECISELY because it's not a proper noun (dag). `Dag` on the other hand is clearly something that has its own name - like the first name of a person that does not have to be a "word". It's just a "named entity". It has no relation to class name in the docs, this is not the point at all. This is the "concept" we are talking about that we "named" and "Capitalizing" it makes perfect sense IMHO. J.
