At 09:11 AM 8/22/2005 -1000, Brian Kirsch wrote:
The two suggestions currently floating around other than UString are:
1. Unicode
2. Text
Unicode is nice cause it is straight and to the point and will be easily
understandable by developers familiar with what Unicode is.
But also has the flipside that Python developers who know what Unicode is
may go looking for a "String" type.
Text on the other hand is a bit simpler for the beginning developer to
understand but is not descriptive on the types it accepts.
For example, passing a Python str to a proposed Text type will raise an
error on Repository commit since the type only accepts unicode.
This would be just as confusing with the Unicode name, since Python accepts
pure ASCII strings wherever the unicode type is accepted. Regardless of
which name is used the type should probably accept pure ASCII strings anyway.
So the question is do we go with a descriptive (Unicode) or simplistic
(Text) approach.
I would say the question is whether we go with a name that defines the
purpose of the value (Text) or describes an implementation detail
(Unicode). :)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
