> Although I'm not sure I agree that the final choice of names was necessarily > very representative of the "consensus", ...
Well, I guess there was a bit of enlightened dictatorship going on behind the scenes ;-) i'm really glad I adopted one suggestion (which originally I wasn't for doing) -- short pagenames with no case-changes. I've just had to type all these names by hand into NuVoc in order to split monadic and dyadic links. Well, that's only one task out of potentially hundreds... Ian On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 5:40 AM, Sherlock, Ric <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: Ian Clark >> >> Raul, the boat's just left (...but I guess we can send another boat >> out after it...) >> >> Actually I (half) agree with you. If you search for the word CamelCase >> on: >> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/FormalPageNames >> you'll see my proposal, which is for a clutch of CamelCase names at >> wiki root >> (though this is not explicitly stated). >> I got no support for that idea so I went ahead with the "consensus". >> You can see it on: http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/NuVoc > > Although I'm not sure I agree that the final choice of names was necessarily > very representative of the "consensus", I sympathise with Ian's predicament. > Trying to make a timely decision on an issue like this by email committee is > clearly not easy!! > > IMO the best path forward from here is to leave the page names Ian has > decided on for now and concentrate on adding content. That process may well > help us decide whether the current names are good, or others would be better. > If that turns out to be the case, then I'm sure that we will be able to come > up with some renaming solution. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
