Subject: Re: bug#6675: 23.2; field, header and headers

From: Štěpán Němec <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:06:50 +0200

Leo <[email-masked]> writes:

> RFC822, 2822, 5322 all seem very clear about the meaning and use of
> 'field' and 'header'.
>
> However in function names and arguments in message.el and Gnus, header
> usually means 'field' and headers means 'header'. Sometimes field is
> used directly to mean 'field' as in message-fetch-field.
>
> I find this inconsistency confusing. I think message.el and Gnus should
> follow the same terminology used in the RFCs mentioned above and other
> files, for example those in mail/, in Emacs to be consistent with their
> use of 'field' and 'header'.

Just in case you didn't know and it might be of some help/reference:

(info "(gnus)Headers")
(info "(gnus)Terminology")

My take on it is: consistency surely is nice, but I never felt this to
be a problem with Gnus (IOW, I see there is a lot of problems with
inconsistent identifier naming, not only in Gnus, but in Emacs in
general (as in any software of its size), but I don't see a problem with
headers/fields in particular); bigger concern for me is that some
not-necessarily-very-careful-and-well-thought-out change to the manual
or even function names as you seem to suggest would make things only
worse.

Štěpán