sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality
- From: Duane Malcolm <d.malcolm AT auckland.ac.nz>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 11:40:34 +1300
Andrew wrote:
Wrong word sorry, i had just woken up when i wrote that. Anyways, someday
we might have more spell states than held and exiled and i dont want to
end up polluting the gaze command namespace, if it has the show prefix
its less messy. Although i'd rather have it be
gaze show held
gaze show exiled
Sorry if I've repeated something that has already been discussed, I admit I haven't been following the mailing list closely.
However, isn't "gaze show" redundant. When you gaze at something, you expect something to be showing.
Also, there are "gaze history", "gaze activity", "gaze search 'phrase'" but not "gaze show activity", gaze show history" or "gaze show search 'phrase'"
If you mix the structure, users will be scratching their heads saying "Now was it 'gaze show held' or 'gaze held'? I can never remember, I know it's "gaze history", so I'll try "gaze held". Arrrg, I wish the developers of sourcemage 20 years ago chose one structure"
Just some thoughts, maybe I should go back to my work.
Cherio, Duane
oh well.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 03:29:17PM -0500, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
And I thought we're trying to be "parallel," 'cause "orthogonal" usually means "contrary to" or "regardless of" ;-D. FWIW, my variant is shorter...
Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:18:26PM +0100, neuron wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 09:48:08AM -0800, Andrew wrote:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 11:21:40AM -0500, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
Why not simply "gaze exiled" or even "gaze exile" (it's both a verb and a noun)?
I think we were trying to be orthoganol to gaze show-held
Exactly :)
Well, not quite "exactly". I thought it was spelled "orthogonal".
Seth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
--------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message is intended only for the recipient, and may be a confidential attorney-client communication or may otherwise be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please be aware that any dissemination or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.
--------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
-
[SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Duane Malcolm, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Andrew, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, Arwed von Merkatz, 01/25/2005
- Sorcery Consistency (WAS: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality), Paul Mahon, 01/25/2005
- Re: Sorcery Consistency (WAS: Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality), Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality, David Kowis, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Seth Alan Woolley, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
neuron, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Andrew, 01/25/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] devel sorcery & gaze new functionality,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 01/25/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.