At 11:44 -0500 2002.01.14, John Gruber wrote: >Chris Nandor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 1/14/02 at 9:27a: > >> Yes, I agree it is confusing. I am not crazy about MacOSX, but can think >> of nothing better, so I am not objecting. > >I have a feeling that "MacOSX" is not future-proofed. > >What happens if the next major revision to the OS is _not_ named >"Mac OS X 11", but instead "Mac OS XI", or (preferably) "Mac OS 11"?
Yeah, another good point. Hrm. Although, the way Apple is doing it now, the OS is named "Mac OS X" and its version is "10.1.2", so the complete name is "Mac OS X 10.1.2"; similarly, it is "Mac OS 9.2.1". So if they continued with that, it would be "Mac OS X 11.0". However, there is no way of knowing what Apple will do in this regard; I don't think consistency is necessarily going to be the standard by which future rules apply. I wonder if maybe Mac:: is a better namespace, and then say in the docs which versions of "Mac" are supported? -- Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pudge.net/ Open Source Development Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://osdn.com/
