29 May
2012
29 May
'12
4:35 p.m.
On May 29, 2012, at 3:20 PM, Eduard Moraru wrote:
Hi devs,
For the new messageSender macro [1][2], I chose the name using the
"attachmentSelector" macro as a template:
"<object><personified-action>"
Vincent did not really like the "messageSender" name and proposed
"message", "sendMessage" or "userMessage".
Since AFAIK we don`t currently have a naming convention for wiki macro
It's not related to wiki macros but to macros in general.
It's true that we don't have an official rule. However we've been following a
strategy. So far our "unofficial" rules has been to always try to find the
shortest possible name for all our macros.
names, I`d like to propose that we stick to the
patterns:
1) "<object><personified-action>" (attachmentSelector,
messageSender) for
action-oriented macros and
2) "<object(s)>" (documents, spaces, activity) for display-oriented
macros
For 2), it's pretty clear, but for 1), I personally prefer
"<object><personified-action>" since overall it is a noun and, in
english,
the phrase "messageSender macro" sounds better to me than "sendMessage
macro". Also, I think that the main action of the action-oriented macro
should be reflected in its name.
I`d like your opinion on the matter and also new proposals if you have any.
Here's my +1 for 1) and 2).
So should we rename all our script macros? No of course.
e.g. {{velocity}} --> {{velocityExecutor}} or {{velocityExecution}}
It's not fully incompatible with your proposal though; we just need to make it a bit
more generic.
So we could have:
1') <object> whenever possible (not just display macros)
2') <object><Qualifier> otherwise. I'm not sure about what qualifier
we should use and whether we should make it a rule or not. for the message sending macro
we could have "Send", "Sending", "Sender".
Now I'd personally prefer <verb><object> for 2') I think. I tend to
prefer "sendMessage" which IMO is simpler and more obvious to read in English
than "messageSender".
If "send" is not the correct verb (see Eddy's reply on this) then
"postMessage" or "composeMessage" are nicer IMO than messagePoster or
messageComposer.
Thanks
-Vincent