| 1 |
On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 22:31:19 +0000 |
| 2 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> We made a deliberate decision not to use the word "atom" in PMS |
| 5 |
> because it means subtly different things in different contexts. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
You're doing it again! You're not citing any decisions on actual |
| 8 |
mailing lists, chat logs or in documentation, and you use qualifications |
| 9 |
like "subtl[e]" to denote some deeper rationale that is apparently very |
| 10 |
difficult to explain to the "uninitiated". Good job, if your job was to |
| 11 |
deter the "uninitiated". |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Where was that decision recorded? What subtle differences did you |
| 14 |
perceive? Which contexts lead to those different meanings, and why did |
| 15 |
you not keep "atom" and qualify it according to context? Did you |
| 16 |
document the history, present and future of the term "atom" so you |
| 17 |
could point out why it was rejected for future use? Even, what |
| 18 |
real-world problem were you trying to solve in rejecting "atom"? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
jer |
Archives