On Mon Aug 13 2012 Ivan Kanis wrote:
> "Roland Winkler" wrote:
> > On Sun Aug 12 2012 Leo wrote:
> >> (bbdb-defstruct record
> >> firstname lastname affix aka organization phone address mail notes cache)
> >>
> >> We should rename `notes' in the above to `ext' (for extensions). `notes'
> >> and `note' are both used in the BBDB and they confuse me every time.
>
> My vote is to keep notes. I have used BBDB for years and have never seen
> note (without an s at the end). Furthermore ext makes me think of phone
> of extension which I think this field is not about.
Leo's proposal only affects BBDB internals. As I said in my previous
email, the proposed change should not be noticeable for most users.
The question is about the generic internal name for user-defined
note fields. A note field is a cons (LABEL . VALUE), where LABEL is
the name of the note field chosen by the user (and visible to the
user), and VALUE is its value (a string). The most common value for
LABEL is `notes'. Previously the internal name for the list of all
such cons pairs was also `notes' which was very confusing, as noted
by Leo. I replaced this internal name by `Notes'. Leo didn't know I
recently made this change. He suggested `ext' instead.
However, Leo's proposed change could also affect function names such
as bbdb-record-note and bbdb-record-set-note that address individual
note fields. To be internally consistent, these should become
something like bbdb-record-ext and bbdb-record-set-ext. I am a bit
hesitant to make such a change.
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
___
bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
