[REBOL] Re: rebol/base
From: gscottjones:mchsi at: 30-Sep-2002 9:36
Hi, Mike,
From: Mike
> Does anyone else think the naming of base and core
> are reversed? Seems that core would be the smallest,
> 'core' piece of rebol, and base would add features on
> top of the core.
A similar thought occurred to me in regard to /View. In retrospect,
REBOL/View could have been the "core" of the gui features, and REBOL/VID (or
REBOL/View/VID) the loaded version. Product confusion would (and should)
exclude this option at this point. Besides, /VID would not then adequately
convey the other bundled features (schemes, etc).
Given that it is unlikely that RT would be bold and brazen enough to
_rename_ current products, then I personally would gravitate more toward:
REBOL/Face (originally proposed by Chris RG. IIRC)
or incorporating a variation on Laurence G's suggestion (REBOL/Baseview):
REBOL/Base/Face
Did anyone mention the following? (other possibilities)
REBOL/GUI
or
REBOL/GDI
or, by extension of the path/refinement concept:
REBOL/Base/GUI
REBOL/Base/GDI
These later two suffer from a conceptual incongruity by suggesting that
/GUI and /GDI are already incorporated within REBOL/Base. Maybe those two
should be nixed on talking it out. :-)
> I don't know what that means for
> the /view question. Maybe /viewcore and /view?
> or /view and /view+
> Just please not view++ :-)
Or even just REBOL/Viewbase, incorporating Laurence's and Mike's ideas.
In a tribute to the dark side, will we eventually see REBOL/ECMA?
Answer: REBOL/ECMA.NOT
:-)
--Scott Jones
