Re: Just a Little Explanaton for Veering (RE: Blueberry/Unicode/ XML)

["Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@home.com>]

[Rick Jelliffe]

> One of the great reasons is learning: people can learn using examples in
> familiar words.  If we look at books on XML from Japan or China, the ones
> written in Japan (e.g. Okui-san's books) use kanji element names.  The
> learner can concentrate on the substance without being diverted by
English:
> they will not be confused as to what is a keyword and what is a
> situation-dependent name.  There is an advantage in those examples being
> real.
>
Think of all the books and articles on programming you've read that
emphasize the importance of good naming conventions.  They will tell you to
"select a name that suggests the nature" of the thing named; how important
they are to understanding the intent of the program; and so on.  Think of
all the arguments on this list about naming of new things in SAX2.  Even
that recent thread on schema vs schemata - it could only have had any
meaning to English-speakers.

Markup names are like that too.  You have to be very familiar with a
language to use it like that.  If people can't use their own language (or
one they know well), they can't follow all that naming advice.  If it was
truly important (as I think), it has to have a damaging effect on their
work.

Cheers,

Tom P