Re: AW: Re: SVN: zope.location/trunk/s - moved IPossibleSite and ISite from zope.app.component to zope.location

Roger Ineichen napisał(a):
> Renaming doesn't make sense to me since in every book and 
> documentation ISite is used. I'm against every beautification
> which has no benefit. 
> 
> IPossibleSite --> ISite makes perfect sense to me.
> IPossibleSite --> IComponentSite doesnt make sense to me.
> and
> IPossibleComponentSite --> IComponentSite is worth to comment on.
> 
> Regards
> Roger Ineichen

Yes, ISite is already used as a well-known term for Zopers (is short and 
'handy'), but in general I just don't like the name Site/ISite. It does 
not corresponds to the meaning that most of the people from 'outside' of 
'Zope world' have, and it was confusing me at the begining of my history 
with Zope. Even now sometimes looking for a help on Web (googling ;)) is 
a little pain, couse very specific (narrow) key words used for finding a 
solution gives no results, and at the same time not using some of them 
leads to hunderds/thousands of pages with information of 'sites' in the 
meaning of portal/web_apps or others.

Personally I don't like ComponentSite as well (and probably won't like 
anything with the word 'site' inside ;)))

Component- or Local- Registry will be much more appreciated to me, but I 
don't want to vote right now for any of them. I just think that some 
other name(s) (than 'Site') should be invited/proposed, discussed and 
than used (I vote for that!), even for the sake of 'breaking relations' 
to previous name (by 'previous' I mean current term 'Site') that could 
be met in books/docs.

-- 
Ramok