Re: [Fwd: Re: terminology for purple numbers]

[Eugene Eric Kim <eekim@eekim.com>]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, Murray Altheim wrote:    (01)

> The other identifier we should probably figure out F2F, as
> I'm unclear on what we are even calling the *idea* (structure,
> or what?). But remember, these are really only one or two
> character mnemonics and should probably be acronyms for things
> that are actually being implemented in these tools. I'd prefer
> that they contain "id" since they actually are IDs. Literally.    (02)

I expressed my preference for 'hid' or 'pid' in my other e-mail, but I
couldn't resist making a point here.  This seems exactly like the kind of
ontological disagreement we want to capture.    (03)

Eric, why would you say that a path-style description is not an ID?    (04)

-Eugene    (05)

-- 
+=== Eugene Eric Kim ===== eekim@eekim.com ===== http://www.eekim.com/ ===+
|       "Writer's block is a fancy term made up by whiners so they        |
+=====  can have an excuse to drink alcohol."  --Steve Martin  ===========+    (06)