From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [doc] User Manual Suggestion Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20090424233509.GA15341@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <200904240051.46233.johan@herland.net> <200904242230.13239.johan@herland.net> <20090424213848.GA14493@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090424231436.GA15058@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Daniel Barkalow , Johan Herland , git@vger.kernel.org, David Abrahams , "J. Bruce Fields" To: Michael Witten X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 25 01:36:55 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LxUww-0003IB-PB for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 25 Apr 2009 01:36:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755245AbZDXXfV (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756279AbZDXXfU (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:20 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:58013 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755990AbZDXXfT (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:19 -0400 Received: (qmail 32723 invoked by uid 107); 24 Apr 2009 23:35:29 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:29 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:35:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 06:31:26PM -0500, Michael Witten wrote: > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 18:14, Jeff King wrote: > > Junio suggested "object name" in another thread, which I think is nicely > > descriptive. > > The reason I don't like "object name" is that "name" has connotations > that don't go well with the idea of referencing. Isn't "address" (or > "location") better in this sense? I'm not sure I agree, but if you are concerned with "name", then I think something like "object id" or "object identifier" would probably be better. "address" and "location" imply to me that they are part of a contiguous set. And while technically they may be considered addresses of a sparse 2^160 array, I'm not sure that explanation is really helping new users understand what is going on. What the user really cares about is that it is persistent and unambiguous. -Peff