On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 01:04:56PM -0300, Vin??cius dos Santos Oliveira wrote:
2013/5/31 Martin Owens <doctormo@...400...>
> On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 11:01 -0300, Vin??cius dos Santos Oliveira wrote:
> > I didn't find, but the paper homepage
> > ( http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/kopf/pixelart/
) has a
> > bibtex reference sample and the key used to reference this paper is
> > kopf2011.
> Oh that, that's just the meta data id
> I was hoping to convince you of the lack of elegance of the 'kopf2011'
> string. It can't be pronounced (in English).
Isn't more important to use a name that uniquely identify the thing? We can
pronounce kopf the same way we pronounce http (letter by letter).
In the Inkscape interface, we can simply put the text "convert pixel art",
but in the program source code, there should be more detail.
I'm open to suggestions anyway.
Is there anything else we can use instead?
I think kopf2011 is a fine name - it's pretty much how it would be
referenced in any academic paper, so it's typically how algorithms are
named unless the author provides a very memorable name. kopf doesn't
seem hard to pronounce to me.
I'm coding aside from discussing the library. You guys don't need to worry
about the timeline or me spending time in this discussion.
Naming is a very important part of coding.