Name of template parameters

[Peter Bergström <peter.bergstrom@eurostep.com>]

Hi,

 

I have been editing templates for a while now, and I have a question regarding the naming of parameters.

 

Why do we say xxx_class_name for parameters that are reference data? Just to indicate that they are reference data?

 

I think this makes things more confusing.

Take a numerical property as an example, I would anticipate to see a value parameter, and a unit parameter.

What we have is

- value

- unit_class_name

- si_unit

- rep_class_name

- rep_ecl_id

 -unit_ecl_id

 

It is not intuitive what ‘unit’ parameter to use, I think, but we can’t do much about that, except call si_unit ‘si_or_not’ or something… I don’t like that.

 

But I would like to change the rep_class_name to ‘context’, because it is the name of the context, not of the representation. I find it unnecessary to call it context_class_name, though.

 

And I would like to change unit_class_name to ‘unit’, since it is then easier to understand that this _is_ the unit (I think).

 

So my suggestion (which I have already implemented for your review in cap Representing_properties_numerically, template representing_value_numeric) is to have the following parameters:

-          value

-          unit

-          si_unit

-          context

-          context_ecl_id

-          unit_ecl_id

 

 

Please tell me if this is OK, or if I should change back.

 

Peter Bergström

Eurostep

PS I’m not suggesting that we should drop the _class_name all over the place. For IDs it makes perfect sense, we have an ID in an attribute, and the id_class_name is the class of ID. With unit and context above it is not the same, however, the class name is also the value of the unit and context.