Re: intl 1.0.0RC1

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
[email protected]   http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829   MSN: [email protected]

-- 
PHP Unicode & I18N Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php