> From owner-GRASSLIST@baylor.edu Mon Nov 27 09:38:39 2000
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2000 at 09:00:40PM +0100, Morten Hulden wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Nov 2000, seppo kaitala wrote:
> > 
> > > Would it be good if the notation would be same for the same kind of
> > > consepts.
> > > 
> > > For instance in commands
> > > 
> > > v.proj map=name [out=name] inloc=name [dbase=name] [set=name] 
> > > 
> > > r.proj input=name location=name [output=name] [mapset=name][dbase=name]
> > > [method=name] [res=value] 
> > 
> > The case r.proj/v.proj should be easy to fix, but which one is
> > preferrable? Also, s.proj's syntax is similar to r.proj's. But I think I
> > at least would prefer v.proj's shorter. Others?
>
> Well, I thought we agreed a while back to use input/output whenever it
> was appropriate. IMHO, a "map" is a complete printed or digital thing,
> with scales, north arrows, grid marks, legends, etc... I think "inloc"
> should be "location" as well (it's only 3 more characters). 
>

I agree, I think it would be better to use full description name.
"inloc" is somewhat nonintuitive.

Huidae Cho


