Re: Naming advice for a templating module

* Mark Stosberg <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2006-02-26 01:40]:
>I don't like the repetition. Repeating "XML" adds no value to
>the name for me.

Well, taken versus the XML::Template approach, it makes some
amount of sense. With XML::Template you don’t actually write
templates so much as grammars and instances of them; with my
module, you write an template XML file.

>I'll suggest "XML::Template::Strict", since your approach seems
>to be stricter about validness than "XML::Template".

Careful: well-formed != valid. I don’t do anything about
validation; in terms of well-formedness, XML::Template is even
stricter than the approach I’m following. I expect that my module
will be capable of producing malformed markup if you try to
coerce it hard enough – just not in any common scenario.

Also, if anything, it would have to be XML::StrictTemplate, since
XML::Template::Strict sounds like it has some sort of commonality
with XML::Template, of which there is absolutely none.

Any way to express “idiomatic” in a short word that’s suitable
for a descriptive name?

Maybe I should give up and just try to generically differentiate
from XML::Template, like maybe XML::ExTemplate?

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>