Re: Manila Message Level Access Control - test and review period
Posted
Last Modified
In Response To
2/28/2002; 2:40 PM by Jim RoepckeLast Modified
In Response To
2/28/2002; 2:40 PM by Jim Roepcke
Re: Manila Message Level Access Control - test and review period (#16221)
Reply To This Message [Edit]
On Thursday, February 28, 2002, at 05:05 AM, Jim Byrne wrote:
> David,
>
> For what it is worth - I also think term cohorts is a bit confusing. I
> had
> to stop and think what exactly it was about when reading the
> instructions.
While it might not be the most obvious term, I think David has the right
idea in picking something slightly off-mainstream. History has shown
that UserLand doesn't always consider the 3rd party namespace before
deciding what to call new features in their namespace.
Jim
> David,
>
> For what it is worth - I also think term cohorts is a bit confusing. I
> had
> to stop and think what exactly it was about when reading the
> instructions.
While it might not be the most obvious term, I think David has the right
idea in picking something slightly off-mainstream. History has shown
that UserLand doesn't always consider the 3rd party namespace before
deciding what to call new features in their namespace.
Jim
Enclosures
None.
Replies
RE: Manila Message Level Access Control - test and review period
2/28/2002 by Emmanuel. M. Decarie
>While it might not be the most obvious term, I think David has the right >idea in picking something slightly off-mainstream.
2/28/2002 by Emmanuel. M. Decarie
RE: Manila Message Level Access Control - test and review period
3/1/2002 by David Bayly
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 14:40:32 -0500, jim@roepcke.com (Jim Roepcke) wrote:- > > Read on the web at http://community.scriptmeridian.org/16226
3/1/2002 by David Bayly