wiki-archive/twiki/data/UBIF/ResolvedTopicAttributesLowe...

222 lines
6.6 KiB
Plaintext

head 1.10;
access;
symbols;
locks; strict;
comment @# @;
1.10
date 2009.11.20.02.02.04; author LeeBelbin; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.9;
1.9
date 2007.03.06.17.30.00; author TWikiGuest; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.8;
1.8
date 2004.07.15.18.02.00; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.7;
1.7
date 2004.06.11.10.15.50; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.6;
1.6
date 2004.05.28.12.19.00; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.5;
1.5
date 2004.05.28.11.25.11; author JessieKennedy; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.4;
1.4
date 2004.05.25.21.18.36; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.3;
1.3
date 2004.05.25.07.53.18; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.2;
1.2
date 2004.05.25.07.04.37; author WalterBerendsohn; state Exp;
branches;
next 1.1;
1.1
date 2004.05.25.05.55.00; author GregorHagedorn; state Exp;
branches;
next ;
desc
@none
@
1.10
log
@none
@
text
@%META:TOPICINFO{author="LeeBelbin" date="1258682524" format="1.1" version="1.10"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="UBIF.SchemaDiscussion"}%
---+!! %TOPIC%
Currently in Main.BDI and ABCD the element names are capitalized to allow running multiple words together in a readable way (e. g. "<nop>NaturalLanguageDescriptions"). From what I remember from Trevor's slides at the Berlin meeting, <nop>TaxonNames is also using this style. This largely conforms with Java style (except that the simple-type elements should rather be lower case, being members of the class) and fully with .NET style.
However, the xml attributes are currently all lower case in Main.BDI ("language") and capitalized in ABCD ("Language"). I have no information on <nop>TaxonNames. I suggest all-lower case for attributes (xhtml-style), under the assumption that attributes are sparsely used (as is currently the case in Main.BDI). Can we agree on this? I see no problems following ABCD style and treat attributes and elements under the same rules. However, before we change Main.BDI I would like to make sure that the relevant TDWG/GBIF standards follow the same style.
Are there any other standards that should be considered? Please respond ASAP, changing this later would be annoying.
-- [[Main.GregorHagedorn][Gregor Hagedorn]] - 25 May 2004
Please stick to the upper plus lower case convention for element names. In attributes I will adapt to any (common) naming convention.
-- Walter Berendsohn - 25 May 2004
In <nop>TaxonNames/Concepts we also use the upper plus lower case convention for all element names and the all lower case for attribute names so would vote to stay with that.
-- Jessie Kennedy - 28 May 2004
The topic seems to be resolved and lower case attributes accepted.
-- [[Main.GregorHagedorn][Gregor Hagedorn]] - 28 May 2004
%META:TOPICMOVED{by="GregorHagedorn" date="1089915454" from="SDD.ResolvedTopicAttributesLowerOrUpperCase" to="UBIF.ResolvedTopicAttributesLowerOrUpperCase"}%
@
1.9
log
@Added topic name via script
@
text
@d1 2
d5 1
a5 3
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1089914520" format="1.0" version="1.8"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="UBIF.SchemaDiscussion"}%
Currently in SDD and ABCD the element names are capitalized to allow running multiple words together in a readable way (e. g. "<nop>NaturalLanguageDescriptions"). From what I remember from Trevor's slides at the Berlin meeting, <nop>TaxonNames is also using this style. This largely conforms with Java style (except that the simple-type elements should rather be lower case, being members of the class) and fully with .NET style.
d7 1
a7 1
However, the xml attributes are currently all lower case in SDD ("language") and capitalized in ABCD ("Language"). I have no information on <nop>TaxonNames. I suggest all-lower case for attributes (xhtml-style), under the assumption that attributes are sparsely used (as is currently the case in SDD). Can we agree on this? I see no problems following ABCD style and treat attributes and elements under the same rules. However, before we change SDD I would like to make sure that the relevant TDWG/GBIF standards follow the same style.
@
1.8
log
@none
@
text
@d1 2
@
1.7
log
@none
@
text
@d1 2
a2 2
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1086948950" format="1.0" version="1.7"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="UnifiedBioInfoFramework"}%
d22 1
a22 1
%META:TOPICMOVED{by="GregorHagedorn" date="1085747137" from="SDD.AttributesLowerOrUpperCase" to="SDD.ResolvedTopicAttributesLowerOrUpperCase"}%
@
1.6
log
@none
@
text
@d1 2
a2 2
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1085746740" format="1.0" version="1.6"}%
%META:TOPICPARENT{name="OverarchingPatternsForTdwgSchemata"}%
@
1.5
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="JessieKennedy" date="1085743511" format="1.0" version="1.5"}%
d9 1
a9 1
-- Gregor Hagedorn - 25 May 2004
d18 5
@
1.4
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1085519916" format="1.0" version="1.4"}%
d14 4
@
1.3
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1085471598" format="1.0" version="1.3"}%
d5 1
a5 3
However, the xml attributes are currently all lower case in SDD ("language") and capitalized in ABCD ("Language"). I have no information on <nop>TaxonNames.
I suggest all-lower case for attributes, under the assumption that attributes are sparsely used (as is currently the case in SDD). Can we agree on this? I have no problems following ABCD style and treat attributes and elements under the same rules. However, before we change I would like to make sure that all standards follow the same style.
@
1.2
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="WalterBerendsohn" date="1085468677" format="1.0" version="1.2"}%
d3 1
a3 1
Currently in SDD and ABCD the element names are captialized to allow running multiple words together in a readable way <nop>("NaturalLanguageDescriptions"). From what I remember from Trevor's slides at the Berlin meeting, <nop>TaxonNames is also using this style. This largely conforms with Java style (except that the simple-type elements should rather be lower case, being members of the class) and fully with .NET style.
d7 1
a7 1
I suggest all-lower case attributes, under the assumption that attributes are sparsely used (as currently in SDD). Can we agree on this? I have no problems following ABCD style and treat attributes and elements under the same rules. However, before we change I would like to make sure that all standards follow the same style.
d13 3
a15 1
Please stick to the UpperLowerCase convention for element names. In attributes I will adapt to any (common) naming convention.
@
1.1
log
@none
@
text
@d1 1
a1 1
%META:TOPICINFO{author="GregorHagedorn" date="1085464500" format="1.0" version="1.1"}%
d12 2
@