Re: Package proposal Science_Weather

The code you have there looks clean to me, and I like the decomposition you are planning for the package. I am a little concerned with the name of the package though. When we started the 'Science' category in PEAR the idea was to put there packages that dealt w/ Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc. In the case of your package, it would nice if it were: Science_Meterology_Weather But that would give the idea that I could use the code there to process weather related data (e.g. calculate flow rates/fields from wind measurments), not just access the weather conditions from a region and display them. Strictly it is accessing metereological data from a server, not doing any processing or implementing metereological algorithms. If we had a 'Services' category, then I would propose a better name would be: Services_Weather IMHO that will explain the aims of the code better. At some point I proposed something like that for servers that generate 'true' random numbers (using attached hardware random number generators), and thought finally that Services_RandomNumber would've been a good name, but did not get enough +1s back then. Bottomline: Conditional +1 for the code to access the weather services -1 on the current name, as a better one could reflect the purpose in a more clean and precise way (i.e. Services_Weather) If the name is changed I am +1 unconditionally. --- Alexander Wirtz <lists@zyanka.li> wrote > On Fri, Aug 22, 2003 at 01:36:48PM +0200, Stephan Schmidt wrote: > > Basically I like the class very much, but I'd like to see it renamed to > > Science_Weather_WetterDotCom. > > I don't think that it's useful to go and create a unified interface for all > > services that are available, as they probably won't be interchangeable. I > > guess different services will provide different information and so using a > > distinct name for the class should be enough... > > I'm at work right now :) tuupola from pear@efnet convinced me to use a > factoring framework and right now we have > > Weather.php > |--|--Common.php > |--Metar.php > |--WeatherDotCom.php > > Code is working like > > $weatherDotCom = &Science_Weather::service("WeatherDotCom"); > $weatherDotCom->searchLocation("foobar"); > ... > > you get the idea... > > The interchangeability stops there, where a certain service is not providing > a special datafield, so METAR won't have a forecast for example, but the API > for getting the data is the same. > > > If the name is changed, I'm +1 for this package, Coding style is great, > PEAR > > dependency could be removed... > > done. > > The code is already working, I tested them with two example-scripts and I > get the same result like before the rewrite, so maybe I can give you an > overview in a few hours. > > Regards, > Alexander > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > ===== -- Jesus M. Castagnetto (jcastagnetto@yahoo.com) Research: http://metallo.scripps.edu/ Personal: http://www.castagnetto.org/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com