Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!CS-UMASS.ARPA!GUTFREUND
From: GUTFREUND@CS-UMASS.ARPA ("Steven H. Gutfreund")
Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Subject: re: embeddedCapitals
Message-ID: <8803251425.AA01435@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 25 Mar 88 11:56:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 26

Since the advantages/disadvantages to the various concatenation schemes
(embeddedCapitals, hyphenation, straight concatenation) are all basically
marignal in nature, I would suggest that one should not take an absolutist
position. That is, one should neither try and convice the world that one
position is correct, or more importantly, one should not adopt a permanent
fixed standard for all of ones own code. 

What do you say? Why shouldn't I adopt a personal standard for myself. 
Isn't this a free country and I have the right to self-determination
(note use of hypen). Yes, but in an environment such as smalltalk, where
a major factor in the success of the environment is its homogeneity,
and transparency - the consistant usage of a one metaphoric system
throughout all layers and levels of the system, one does not what to
stack a heterogenous layer of using a different metaphor on top
of the system. I would argue strongly for maintaining this metaphoric
coherence with respect to any application layered on smalltalk. 
Work within the basic structure provided by the window system, pop-up
menus, etc. unless there is a more than marginal advantage to your
scheme (e.g. maybe you would like to use pull-down menus, or shuffle
menus instead of pop-up menus. If so, make sure this transformation
is comprehensive throughout the environment).

      -	gutfreund@cs.umass.edu           (via csnet/phoneNet)
	gutfreund@cs-umass.arpa          (via arpanet/milnet)
	steveg@umass.bitnet		 (via bitnet)
	yechezkal-shimon@benDovid.haLevi (via gabbai)