In Plug-in Objects, one can have alternative names for parameters.
If this concept would be applied also to class (and layer) names, many of the problems of importing and exporting would go away. Many users give strange names to "their" classes so that they would be "at the top".
So, there would be the "true name" (used in export & import) and a name that makes sense to the user.
Of course it would not be mandatory to have two names.
Nevertheless, the proliferation of classes outside user's control by PIOs should also be separately addressed (including easier editing of pop-up lists). Even if we could "rename" Sills to something less silly, we don't necessarily want such a class at all.
You can post now and register later.
If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.
Question
Petri
In Plug-in Objects, one can have alternative names for parameters.
If this concept would be applied also to class (and layer) names, many of the problems of importing and exporting would go away. Many users give strange names to "their" classes so that they would be "at the top".
So, there would be the "true name" (used in export & import) and a name that makes sense to the user.
Of course it would not be mandatory to have two names.
Nevertheless, the proliferation of classes outside user's control by PIOs should also be separately addressed (including easier editing of pop-up lists). Even if we could "rename" Sills to something less silly, we don't necessarily want such a class at all.
Link to comment
3 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.