Re: RSG



Bowie Poag <bjp@primenet.com> wrote:
> > I put "maintained by Bowie Poag and others" in there. I want to keep that
> > thing short, just avoid confusion.
> 
> You can do more than that to avoid confusion, Tom.

what more except stating explicitly that there is an offical guide and this
document is not identical? putting a page of credits there doesn't do much
to make things any clearer, does it?



> > > You cant dictate "look and feel".
> > 
> > no, but you can define guidelines. as it's written there. :)
> 
> Wrong. Guidelines affect programmers, not users. They'll burn you out of
> your home if you try and mandate look and feel guidelines for users.

do we expect users to read the styleguide? oh...


> > > Compliancy levels shouldalso  be in ascending order, not descending. C5
> > > should be bare minimum, not C1, if you insist on abbreviating them that
> > > way.
> > 
> > what do others think about this?
> 
> Ever seen a medalist's podium at the olympics? I'd rather be standing on
> "1" than "3" :)

that's a very good argument to put the important things at 1... :)))


> > I'd like to collect more opinions on "Prog". anyone else got something to
> > say? otherwise we can vote and it would be an uninteresting 1:1 :)
> 
> Dont Bthr Clcg More Opns Aout Prog.  Its a bad idea.

no need to get childish. my argument (again): "Prog" is so common that it's
not even seen as an abbreviation anymore. people who are not nerds have no
trouble immediatly understanding what it means.

any real arguments? I'd like to hear them. until then, "Program" is in the
appendix as "alternative idea".


-- 
The universe does not have laws -- it has habits, and habits can be broken.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]