Hi,

Here's my user point of view, if you don't mind.

I think your argument is about namespaces, which will be in 6 but not
5.2...  So you might want to have IntCollator and IntLocale in 5.2 to avoid
possible collisions, but you would rather have something like Intl::Collator
and Intl::Locale from 5.3 and 6 onward.  I guess the question is: can you
bear with Collator and Locale until we have namespaces?  I know I can.

Guillaume Rossolini


On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:

> Hi!
>
>  Yes. Why can't it be IntlCollator in both 5.x and 6.x? In other words
>> (unless I'm missing something) compatibility between 5.x and 6.x doesn't
>> affect the naming choice.
>>
>
> The thing is that having collators in PHP called IntlCollator and locales
> in PHP called IntlLocale sucks. It looks so awkward and artificial.
>
>  I'm advocating uniformity for the sake of usability :-). (for reasons
>>
>
> I don't see how IntlLocale is more usable than Locale. If you'd be total
> stranger to all the things discussed here and I'd tell you - there's a thing
> called "locale", what do you think would be the name of the class that works
> with it - would you answer "Locale" or "IntlLocale"?
>
>  already given). (I'm a freelance programmer, working on real-world
>> i18n-related code, not an ivory tower academic.)
>>
>
> OK, great - and you'd prefer all your functions and classes to have prefix
> Intl because of that? I know I wouldn't. I would like to have class named
> Locale to work with locales.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
> stas@zend.com   http://www.zend.com/
> (408)253-8829   MSN: stas@zend.com
>
> --
> PHP Unicode & I18N Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>