[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Use of camel case (Naming and Design Rules specifications)
Thanks for the analysis, Robin. I have nothing against camelCase in general (though I've never seen an hRef attribute!). My concern is mixing runtogethernames, hyphen-separated-names, and camelCaseNames all in the same vocabulary tends to make for a lot of confusion. One can spend hours trying to figure out what's wrong with some markup or script only to realize finally that one occurrence of topicRef was misspelled as topicref or one list-item was misspelled listItem. paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Cover [mailto:robin@oasis-open.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 2005 August 24 15:18 > To: DITA TC List > Cc: Robin Cover > Subject: [dita] Use of camel case (Naming and Design Rules > specifications) > > As noted in the DITA Meeting Minutes for 16-August-2005 [1], > I accepted an action item to deliver a set of references > for several NDRs (Naming and Design Rules) specifications > which contain rules for construction of XML component names > (elements, attributes, types, entities, etc). > > I have created a document which provides extracts from ten > (10) different NDRs, and one excerpt from an early ebXML Technical > Architecture specification. The document name is 'camelCase' > because that's what was on my mind; indeed, all ten > NDRs recommend/prescribe the use of camel case for closed > compounds. See: > > http://xml.coverpages.org/camelCase.html >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]