740
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 46:
Line 46: + + + +
→Software naming conventions: Proposal
:[[Python]] moved to [[Python (programming language)]], and other moves and redirects also done. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:35, 1 December 2009 (EST)
:[[Python]] moved to [[Python (programming language)]], and other moves and redirects also done. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 10:35, 1 December 2009 (EST)
::Okay, here I am back. Sorry about the wait; I'm afraid I'd forgotten about the project. After a lot of thought, I'm afraid we'll need to just go with "Name" in general, or "Name (type)" in case of confusion. We can't always have "Name (type)"; does anyone here really want "Office (office suite)" or "Microsoft Office (office suite)"? You could say that "Microsoft Office" is an example of "Brand Name", but we just as clearly want "SQL" and not "IBM SQL". If you really, really want consistency, I suppose that "Name (type)" could work for everything without a brand, but that would be inconsistent with the rest of CP. Even though we need [[Georgia (country)]], we don't force consistency with "Russia (country)" or "Germany (country)".
::So, my suggestion: "Name" in general ("SQL", "BASIC", "Macintosh"), with brand when it's a recognized part (ok, I know I'm being vague here, but you get the picture with "Windows Vista" and "Microsoft Office") and "Name (type)" only when we've got an article on another thing with that name ("Python (snake)", "C (letter of alphabet)"). I think that last caveat is a good way of distinguishing when the other thing with that name is significant enough to bump the programming concept to a disambiguating part of name.
::Again, I'm sorry I'm so late getting back to you.--[[User:EvanW|EvanW]] 12:37, 12 December 2009 (EST)
==About the Messianic Prophesy article==
==About the Messianic Prophesy article==