[r-t] What is a method? (long message, sorry)
mark at snowtiger.net
Fri Aug 8 21:03:39 UTC 2008
> If we follow, as many seem to be implicitly doing, path (a) above, we
> shoot ourselves in the foot. We are condemning anything that does not meet
> the restricted use of "method" to a different name space. For example,
> there is nothing today to prevent me from ringing a new principle,
> completely unrelated to what we all know of as Dixon's, and calling it
Err, and what's the problem with that Don? It doesn't stop the rule-based
Dixons from being called Dixons. As you said, it's in a different namespace.
We already have plenty of examples - Oxford Treble Bob and Oxford Surprise.
So Dixon's Surprise and Dixon's Dixons.
If you put them in the same namespace, then you have the problem the other
way around. A band from Cambridge who invented a new Dixonoid might want to
call it Cambridge. And why shouldn't they?
More information about the ringing-theory