Use Advanced Search to search the entire archive.
[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"
- From: Werner Keil <
>
- To: "
" <
>
- Subject: [jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 11:09:10 +0200
Martin,
Thanks, please see the other thread (I did not want to put too many things
into a single thread or ticket) and if you say the "bottom" or all of the
examples table was rarely used, could you vote for your preference (1. or
2.)
I submitted a pull request to Raj's uom-astronomy project where this
"Density" is also used, so I hope they get a chance to merge it after
"MassDensity" was applied. If we prefer to shorten it, downstream projects
would have to do so again.
Werner
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Martin Desruisseaux <
>
wrote:
>
Hello Werner
>
Le 09/06/15 18:02, Werner Keil a écrit :
>
>
To avoid confusion with others and for the sake of keeping the API
>
compact, is there a problem to cut the list of supported quantities at
>
"Density" then?;-)
>
>
I'm neutral about the inclusion of SurfaceDensity, CurrentDensity and
>
other types (I do not use them myself). But why would their inclusion cause
>
a confusion about what "Density" is? Is there a fear that some peoples
>
could think that "Density" is the base type of all other density types? I
>
would tend to believe that the wide usage of the "density" term would
>
protect it from such harm.
>
>
About "Density" versus "MassDensity", maybe we can also consider the
>
following scenarios when thinking about the risk of confusion:
>
>
- *If we choose "**Density**":* Given that "density" is probably the
>
most widely used term, if someone looking for "mass density" does not
>
find
>
a "MassDensity" interface, he is likely to look for a "Density"
>
interface because he know that "density" is widely used.
>
- *If we choose "**MassDensity**":* I suspect that many peoples
>
looking for the "Density" interface may not be aware of the "mass
>
density" term, and consequently may not find immediately the"
>
MassDensity" interface. They may think that this type is not provided
>
in the API. This would be something similar to
>
https://java.net/jira/browse/UNITSOFMEASUREMENT-9 where the reporter
>
though that the "mass density" type was missing while actually it existed
>
under the name (at that time) "VolumetricDensity".
>
>
>
Martin
>
>