Re: Problems with Properties and Notify Signal Parts

[Richard Cole <rcole itee uq edu au>]

So I'm still a bit confused about where the underscores are turned into 
dashes.
 property names: (yes)
   - registering a property
   - getting a property
   - setting a property

 signal names: (no?)
   - registering a signal
   - emitting a signal
   - registering a signal callback

 signal details: (no)
   - emitting a signal detail
   - registering a signal callback

One doesn't register signal details anywhere does one?

I recognise that you want to stay backwards compatible, but that you 
also want to be as regular as possible. So my argument is for something 
regular and expected.
I would argue that: signal -> no, property -> yes, is simpler than 
signal name -> yes, signal detail -> no, property -> yes. Cause it is 
more rules and property names sometimes get put into signal details and 
so then even this simple statement of the rules is wrong. So I ask, 
whose code would break if it was: signal -> yes, property -> yes? By 
signal -> yes I mean that both signal names and signal details have 
underscores converted to dashes, and by property -> yes I mean that 
property names have underscores converted to dashes.
For someones code to break from signal -> yes, property -> yes, they 
would have to have details with both underscores and dashes that needed 
to be distinguished. Who would need such a thing?
regards,

Richard.