On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:17:36AM -0800, Damian Conway wrote: > Err....no. That's rather the whole point of C<but> properties [*].
> [*] People, we just *have* to find better names for these things! > I'd suggest we henceforth call them "value" properties (for C<but>) > and "referent" properties (for C<is>). Over on [EMAIL PROTECTED] there seemed to be confusion about attributes and properties, given that some languages use one where we use the other. I had a dig in a thesaurus, I suggested that "chattels" and "virtues" were interesting words that unambiguously describe respectively extra data you've attached to a thing, and an extra qualities you've given it. But that's still only one (controversial) word for properties, and we need two. And I don't really like "chattels", whereas"virtues" sits nicely with "bless". I got one private reply, and summarised. But nothing further. Warnock's Dilemma? (Message ID [EMAIL PROTECTED] if that helps - I don't have an archive link). Nicholas Clark
