> open-host-contoller-interface-host-controller-[driver]... > > Quite a lot of semanticla duplication if you ask me.
If you split all acronyms into their component atoms before coming up with new names, I think you'll end up changing quite a lot of technology nomenclature. (Avoid starting names with 'g' for GNU ... ) Eliminating everything that could be implied would give USB "open.o", "universal.o", and "enhanced.o" ... I'm not sure such generic names would be a good idea! :) > [ re why the changes ... ] > Yes yes I see and I second the changes. > But I still have some "esthetical" problems with the > new naming conventions. I'm not religious about them, but so far your own suggestions would further confusion since they end up reusing existing names ... if "ohci" becomes one driver name, then its peer new-style "uhci" version would get confused with one of the old-style drivers. Using that "-hcd" suffix is completely unambiguous. (But if we go with the "usb-uhci-hcd" driver I'd vote to rename it as "uhci-hcd".) - Dave _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
