Simon Cozens <simon / ermine.ox.ac.uk> writes:

> " JamesBritt" <james / jamesbritt.com> writes:
> > That's what popped into my mind, too.  A definitive name is great if
> > there is but one definitive module.
> 
> But as I mentioned, if there's a definitive name, you have to think
> more carefully about why you're writing a different module, and your
> name should reflect what's distinctive about it. Consider
> HTML::Parser, HTML::TokeParser and HTML::TreeBuilder. You can easily tell
> that they're all HTML parsing libraries but they have distinctive styles.

Then what would you call NQXML, REXML, and expat? Each is an XML parser.
Each supplies a SAX-like and DOM-like parser (I think). Sure, they have
different features and different implementations. They're essentially the
same thing at the core, though.

Which one gets the name XML::Parser?

Jim
-- 
Jim Menard, jimm / io.com, http://www.io.com/~jimm/
"I've memorized all the digits of pi. Just not the order they go in."
    -- Charles A. Lieberman, in rec.humor.oracle.d