<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/11/13 14:18, Alan Griffiths
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:528B7338.7090003@canonical.com" type="cite">
      <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
        http-equiv="Content-Type">
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">I think the natural domain name is
        "scene".<br>
        <br>
        It was the first suggestion and was only doubted because we've
        it misinterpreted as implying that it /is a/ scenegraph (rather
        than /has a/ scenegraph).<br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    we've *seen* it misinterpreted<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote cite="mid:528B7338.7090003@canonical.com" type="cite">
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
        In the absence of a clearer, natural name I think we should go
        with "scene" and educate people that think it is synonymous with
        "scenegraph".<br>
        <br>
        On 19/11/13 01:38, Kevin DuBois wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote
cite="mid:CAO_R1ArX9GAk9YsMVT4pM-TTAy_hiGYXqVT=59LaLKcOf6ZYbA@mail.gmail.com"
        type="cite">
        <div dir="ltr">
          <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:courier
            new,monospace">I'm also slightly against 'core', just
            because people will think its more important than it is<br>
            <br>
            scene, model, and model_controller has connotations to me,
            maybe mir::diaroma?<br>
            <br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:courier
            new,monospace">Pretty unloaded word... To me, it means 3d
            objects put in a box for the purposes of displaying. If no
            one supports that though, 'scene' would be my preference.<br>
            <br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:courier
            new,monospace"><br>
          </div>
          <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:courier
            new,monospace">Cheers,<br>
            Kevin<br>
          </div>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 3:32 AM,
            Alexandros Frantzis <span dir="ltr"><<a
                moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:alexandros.frantzis@canonical.com"
                target="_blank">alexandros.frantzis@canonical.com</a>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
              .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
              <div class="im">On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 10:27:31AM +0000,
                Alan Griffiths wrote:<br>
                > This came up again with my resent proposal to move
                Session related state<br>
                > to the "surfaces" component.<br>
                ><br>
                > On 25/10/13 15:22, Kevin Gunn wrote:<br>
                > > I'm ok with "state & implementation code"
                changing from "surface" to<br>
                > > "core". I'm sure others will weigh in.<br>
                ><br>
                > I'm not convinced that it says "semantic data
                model" but neither does<br>
                > "surfaces". But what do folks think about "core"?<br>
                ><br>
                > Strongly For/Weakly For/Weakly Against/Strongly
                Against?<br>
                <br>
              </div>
              I think the term "core" is at the same time too vague and
              too strong.<br>
              It's too vague because it doesn't describe what the "core"
              component of<br>
              mir contains. It's too strong because "core" forces us to
              think in terms<br>
              of a special core component and other non-core components,
              which I don't<br>
              think is appropriate for our architecture.<br>
              <br>
              My vote is on the stronger verge of "Weakly Against"; I am
              sure we could<br>
              get used to it, but I think we can do better. Some
              alternatives<br>
              mentioned on IRC:<br>
              <br>
              mir::scene<br>
              mir:model<br>
              mir::model_controller<br>
              <br>
              Thanks,<br>
              Alexandros<br>
              <div class="HOEnZb">
                <div class="h5"><br>
                  --<br>
                  Mir-devel mailing list<br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com">Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com</a><br>
                  Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a
                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel"
                    target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel</a><br>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>