Skip to main content

[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
>
>


[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

(continued)

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/02/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/04/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/08/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Chris Senior 06/08/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/08/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Martin Desruisseaux 06/09/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/09/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Legrand, Karen 06/09/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/09/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Martin Desruisseaux 06/10/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Werner Keil 06/10/2015

[jsr363-experts] Re: [Vote] Chose name for "MassDensity"

Otávio Gonçalves de Santana 06/14/2015
 
 
Close
loading
Please Confirm
Close