Re: Vocabulary matter: Component vs Element vs Item

[Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>]

"Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> writes:

> Would be nice if there were some explanation somewhere, about how the
> RM choose to assign their signification to Item and Element. Whether
> the thing is named from the point of view of whom send or whom receive
> the thing, is probably important too. You hardly follow a convention
> if you don't understand it :-D

I'd say it's important to name things from the p.o.v. of the user, in
the same way as we write Ada with consideration for the reader. The
implementer can always (usually?) rename internally to make their life
easier, but would have to weigh this against introducing yet more names.