[Chandler-dev] is a unified displayName a good thing?
Katie Capps Parlante
capps at osafoundation.org
Mon Apr 17 09:49:29 PDT 2006
Ted Leung wrote:
> If you look at Bug 1745:
> <https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1745>, you'll see
> that there's another issue related to displayName / title, which is
> localization. I think that the localization stuff points to a separate
> Title attribute rather than displayName. I suppose that you could even
> argue that the two names (title and displayName) are reversed in their
> meanings if you have both of them - title being the "system" name for
> the item and 'displayName' being the text that is localized, indexed,
> and presented to the user.
I don't think your description above is exactly right. The way I see it,
a "two different attributes" proposal should look something like this:
- typically data entered by the user (e.g. title of an event)
- not localized
- indexed, this is the attribute you want in end user searches
- Display Name
- system name
- typically created by parcels: blocks, events, schema items, etc.
- localized (shows up in columns and other display elements)
- not indexed, or indexed separately
The motivator behind having one "displayName" or "displayAttribute" was
a requirement that *any* item should be able to show up in a table and
have some reasonable "display name". I think we can find a way to meet
this requirement some other way -- the localization and index issues are
clearly more important requirements. Right now we have no requirement to
display blocks in tables, for example.
+1 for two different attributes btw.
More information about the chandler-dev