Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML

Yipee! Yes! Yes! Yes! We need a new top level namespace, so we can fill it with XHTML::Simple, XHTML::Simpler, XHTML::Simplest, XHTML::Easy, XHTML::Easy::Simple and XHTML::HardButStandardAndJavaLike! ;--)

Seriously now... I am not sure there is a need for a new namespace: the boundaries between HTML, XHTML and XML are quite fuzzy, a lot of HTML modules can happily deal with XML input, a lot of XML modules have no problems with HTML input (libxml2 has an HTML mode, so all modules based on it can read HTML). Plus XHTML is really pushed by the W3C as just the natural evolution of HTML, so why differentiate them? I am not sure it would make it easier for users, who would have to look at one more namespace, beyond HTML and XML (plus DBIx and a couple of others).

In your specific case would XHTML::Table be very different from HTML::Table? If yes then the similarity in the names will confuse users, if not why not patch it to make it work nicely with DBIx::XHTML::Table?

Comment on Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(jeffa) 2Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML by jeffa (Bishop) on May 08, 2003 at 15:40 UTC
Thanks for replying mirod. Personally, i think that HTML::Table is (sorry for being so harsh) less-than-CPAN-worthy. (have you looked at the source for that module?) It's, IMHO, just not a good, generic solution to the problem at hand. I would actually like to take it over from the author, but that seems mean. As i said before, i would be perfectly happy with HTML::XHTML::Table, but in retrospect, i really wish that i had registered HTML::Table before Mr. Peacock did. :( jeffa L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L-- -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B-- H---H---H---H---H---H--- (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)	[reply]
Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean) by tye (Sage) on May 08, 2003 at 16:31 UTC
Why is it "mean" to improve someone else's work? The only hope for CPAN to "scale" is for this attitude of "Don't touch my/his/her module!" to go away. We all have blind spots. In my experience, the best software has been touched by several hands, each making improvements that the previous author was (relatively) "blind" to. Also, once one succeeds at the challenge of getting a module working well enough to bother to upload it to CPAN, the motivation to work on it will typically decrease, often by a large amount. Your first choice should be to improve an existing CPAN module. The idea of taking your turn at "taking over" the module should not be an unpleasant thought. Nor should the thought of letting someone else take over for you (if you aren't up to directing the merging of their improvements in). I'd think that most new authors would allow previous authors to have influence on the module if they wish to. Try to think of the greater, common good. Be respectful of each other and of the history/heritage of the module, but please don't run away from making one really great module instead of yet another similar (better in at least some ways) module such that it just continues to get harder and harder to pick which module to use. - tye	[reply]
Re: Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean) by Rich36 (Chaplain) on May 08, 2003 at 16:47 UTC
Is there a standard way to request that someone contribute to a module? It would be nice to have something on CPAN like the "Project Help Wanted" link that's on SourceForge.net where people could view postings about people who need assistance in developing or maintaining a module. I've always wanted to contribute something to CPAN, but have had a hard time coming up with anything that's not already there. Helping with maintenance or a rewrite would be a great option. «Rich36»	[reply]
Re: Re: Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean) by Anonymous Monk on May 09, 2003 at 08:02 UTC
Re: Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean) by elusion (Curate) on May 08, 2003 at 19:46 UTC
If you take over a CPAN module that needs help, do you redesign the interface if it needs it? Breaking the interface is considered bad, I think... but sometimes it's too broken to keep. elusion : http://matt.diephouse.com	[reply]
(jeffa) 5Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean) by jeffa (Bishop) on May 09, 2003 at 17:59 UTC
Re: (jeffa) 2Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML by mojotoad (Monsignor) on May 08, 2003 at 16:00 UTC
As i said before, i would be perfectly happy with HTML::XHTML::Table, but in retrospect, i really wish that i had registered HTML::Table before Mr. Peacock did. :( Mr. Peacock did not...the original author was Stacy Lacy, who had looked for volunteers, once upon a time, to take over the module. There were no takers. Two or three years later, Mr. Peacock came along with some enhancements, but could not contact Stacy Lacy and asked the perlmod mailing list whether he could take over the module so that his enhancements could be implemented. Since I still had the original request from Stacy Lacy (1998), I forwarded it along to the list and presto, Mr. Peacock was the new owner. That particular namespace has been around for quite some time. Matt	[reply]
(jeffa) 4Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML by jeffa (Bishop) on May 08, 2003 at 16:17 UTC
Thank you very much for providing (and hunting down) that info mojotoad. I would now like to publically apologize to Mr. Peacock for disrespecting his work. Mr. Peacock ... i am sorry. jeffa L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L-- -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B-- H---H---H---H---H---H--- (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)	[reply]