On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:39 AM, Michael Keith wrote:
One of the problems with the existing name is that it names a new
type of object,
which gives the impression that a new "component" is being introduced.
Rather, this spec is supposed to be introducing a new set of
container services, so
a better direction might be to name it around the sevices that it is
offering and
not the objects that are the beneficiaries of those services (and
are supposed
to already exist outside of this spec).
Excellent point.
A few ideas, just to illustrate what I mean, and start the naming
juices flowing
in this direction:
Context and Injection Services
Container Object Services
Container Contexts and Injection
Contextual Support for Container Objects
I'm not sure I like the literal names. Since the problem to be solved
is so general, literal names are also abstract and somewhat
meaningless. For example, "container", "context" and
"object" are
used everywhere, so they don't help explain how this spec is different.
The other option is to give it an arbitrary name and let the
contents speak
for itself (a la "Swing", and other similar randomly-named
technologies).
"Fred" has a nice ring to it ;-)
I like "weaver" (or "weave", etc.) It fits the problem because a
weaver pulls together materials (components/wool) using a pattern/plan
(config or rug pattern), creating the final completed product
(application or rug). And it has a vivid image, so you can remember
it and distinguish it from other specs. The "weaver pattern" could
even be a replacement for "IoC/DI", a name no one really likes.
-- Scott