You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pivot.apache.org by Greg Brown <gk...@mac.com> on 2009/07/27 17:53:05 UTC
Change "name" to "label" in container attribute classes?
Does anyone have any objection to my changing "name" to "label" in the
attribute classes for Form, TabPane, and Accordion? e.g. instead of:
<TabPane>
<tabs>
<PushButton TabPane.name="Foo"/>
</tabs>
</TabPane>
we'd have:
<TabPane>
<tabs>
<PushButton TabPane.label="Foo"/>
</tabs>
</TabPane>
We're using "name" elsewhere to mean "ID" (generally for programmatic,
rather than human, consumption), and "label" seems more accurate. I
think I originally used "name" to avoid confusion with the Label
class, but, at this point, that seems misguided.
Thoughts?
Greg
Re: Change "name" to "label" in container attribute classes?
Posted by Sandro Martini <sa...@gmail.com>.
Also for me is ok.
Bye
Re: Change "name" to "label" in container attribute classes?
Posted by Christopher Brind <br...@brindy.org.uk>.
No objection from me.
Cheers,
Chris
2009/7/27 Greg Brown <gk...@mac.com>
> Does anyone have any objection to my changing "name" to "label" in the
> attribute classes for Form, TabPane, and Accordion? e.g. instead of:
>
> <TabPane>
> <tabs>
> <PushButton TabPane.name="Foo"/>
> </tabs>
> </TabPane>
>
> we'd have:
>
> <TabPane>
> <tabs>
> <PushButton TabPane.label="Foo"/>
> </tabs>
> </TabPane>
>
> We're using "name" elsewhere to mean "ID" (generally for programmatic,
> rather than human, consumption), and "label" seems more accurate. I think I
> originally used "name" to avoid confusion with the Label class, but, at this
> point, that seems misguided.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Greg
>
>
Re: Change "name" to "label" in container attribute classes?
Posted by Greg Brown <gk...@mac.com>.
In some contexts, I think "caption" may be a good term (certainly
better than "name"). Here, though, I think "label" is more accurate.
To me, "caption" carries a different connotation, like you are
describing a figure in a document.
G
On Jul 27, 2009, at 9:36 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> I actually like "caption" even better than "label".
>
> -- Niclas
>
> On Jul 27, 2009 11:54 PM, "Greg Brown" <gk...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> Does anyone have any objection to my changing "name" to "label" in the
> attribute classes for Form, TabPane, and Accordion? e.g. instead of:
>
> <TabPane>
> <tabs>
> <PushButton TabPane.name="Foo"/>
> </tabs>
> </TabPane>
>
> we'd have:
>
> <TabPane>
> <tabs>
> <PushButton TabPane.label="Foo"/>
> </tabs>
> </TabPane>
>
> We're using "name" elsewhere to mean "ID" (generally for programmatic,
> rather than human, consumption), and "label" seems more accurate. I
> think I
> originally used "name" to avoid confusion with the Label class, but,
> at this
> point, that seems misguided.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Greg
Re: Change "name" to "label" in container attribute classes?
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
I actually like "caption" even better than "label".
-- Niclas
On Jul 27, 2009 11:54 PM, "Greg Brown" <gk...@mac.com> wrote:
Does anyone have any objection to my changing "name" to "label" in the
attribute classes for Form, TabPane, and Accordion? e.g. instead of:
<TabPane>
<tabs>
<PushButton TabPane.name="Foo"/>
</tabs>
</TabPane>
we'd have:
<TabPane>
<tabs>
<PushButton TabPane.label="Foo"/>
</tabs>
</TabPane>
We're using "name" elsewhere to mean "ID" (generally for programmatic,
rather than human, consumption), and "label" seems more accurate. I think I
originally used "name" to avoid confusion with the Label class, but, at this
point, that seems misguided.
Thoughts?
Greg