Mandatory Naming Convention

Chainfire · Jan 24, 2011

Might I suggest a naming convention for posts here ?

Currently we mostly have Windows Mobile, Windows Phone and Android devices on this forum. As this "Paid Software" forum is not split up into different OS's (yet ?) we should have a naming convention.

I am proposing the following scheme, including OS, version number, and root status.

Windows Mobile

[WM 6.x] <appname>
For WM apps that run on all WM 6 versions

[WM 6.5] <appname>
For WM apps specific to WM 6.5 (or 6.0, or 6.1, etc)

Windows Phone 7

[WP 7] <appname>
Any WP7 app

Android

[Android 1.6+] <appname>
For Android specific apps that require at least Android 1.6

[Android 1.6-2.1] <appname>
For Android specific apps that require at least Android 1.6, but are known not to work on for example 2.2 and 2.3

[Android 1.6+, ROOT] <appname>
Same as [Android 1.6+], but requires root.

Release dates, versions
Some apps include release dates and version numbers, suggesting that the date follow the OS specification, and version number follows appname.

For example:

[Android 1.6+, ROOT, 2010.12.31] MyRootApp v1.3 - The greatest app ever!

This is just all just a suggestion. Feel free to comment. I just think it should be easy to see these app sepecifics in the listing directly.

Guardian_Bob · Jan 24, 2011

Chainfire said:
Might I suggest a naming convention for posts here ?

Currently we mostly have Windows Mobile, Windows Phone and Android devices on this forum. As this "Paid Software" forum is not split up into different OS's (yet ?) we should have a naming convention.

I am proposing the following scheme, including OS, version number, and root status.

Windows Mobile

[WM 6.x] <appname>
For WM apps that run on all WM 6 versions

[WM 6.5] <appname>
For WM apps specific to WM 6.5 (or 6.0, or 6.1, etc)

Windows Phone 7

[WP 7] <appname>
Any WP7 app

Android

[Android 1.6+] <appname>
For Android specific apps that require at least Android 1.6

[Android 1.6-2.1] <appname>
For Android specific apps that require at least Android 1.6, but are known not to work on for example 2.2 and 2.3

[Android 1.6+, ROOT] <appname>
Same as [Android 1.6+], but requires root.

Release dates, versions
Some apps include release dates and version numbers, suggesting that the date follow the OS specification, and version number follows appname.

For example:

[Android 1.6+, ROOT, 2010.12.31] MyRootApp v1.3 - The greatest app ever!

This is just all just a suggestion. Feel free to comment. I just think it should be easy to see these app sepecifics in the listing directly.

This is a great start, but what about apps that are linked to a specific type of phone?

For example, there a hardware specific apps for the Galaxy S line which includes Fascinate, Captivate, Vibrant, i9000, etc.

What I'm thinking, and feel free to offer a counter to this, is that most phones can be boiled down to a 3-4 letter identifier, which obviously includes the OS.

For example, Samsung Galaxy S series is SGS. So if I have an app for SGS I'd expect it to be:
[SGS 2.2+, ROOT]

Also in some cases there's specific features of ROM needed, for example with the SGS series again, backlight notification. I'd expect this to part of the list with ROOT.

Finally, I'd put version numbers and/or dates at the end of the post, in ()
So:
[SGS 2.1+ ROOT|BLN] My Cool App (v1.0)
[And 1.6] My Other App (01/15/11)

Any thoughts?

pandapaul · Jan 24, 2011

I think this sounds spot on. We definitely need a good naming convention given the broad scope of this new forum. Thanks much

Chainfire · Jan 24, 2011

Those are good suggestions.

However, it does require the average reader to know what all that means, it possibly makes it all too complicated.

Something like SGS could be an addition, but I think it should still simply start with the OS and version denominator.

For example:

[Android 1.6+, ROOT, SGS, BLN, 2010.12.31] My App v12

This is too long, I know. However date is most commonly in front on XDA. This should also clear up for the WM/WP users that this is not for them. An SGS user will still spot the "SGS" and know it is for them. Non-SGS users might have to read the thread to see that is is "For Samsung Galaxy S devices only!"

We need something better, but removing Android from the title isn't it, I think.

missparker76 · Jan 24, 2011

Wow seems really complex. The more it is complex the less it will be followed by OPs.
While I think it's a nice idea to open a section for paid applications I would have created it in all forums that already have an "Application etc." forum. It would sound more logical IMO and it would show OPs that they have to choose between the 2 subfora (development ongoing / paid applications for advertising only).
Creating juste one forum for all OS, devices etc. will make it difficult to find information in it and I don't think people will have the reflex to go in General forum to find applications.
If the application is in HD2 forum for example no need to have a long title people will know that the application is for HD2 only.
Just my 2 cents

Chainfire · Jan 24, 2011

You are absolutely right there, but paid apps are not allowed to be posted in the device-specific sections

Guardian_Bob · Jan 24, 2011

Chainfire said:
Those are good suggestions.

However, it does require the average reader to know what all that means, it possibly makes it all too complicated.

Something like SGS could be an addition, but I think it should still simply start with the OS and version denominator.

For example:

[Android 1.6+, ROOT, SGS, BLN, 2010.12.31] My App v12

This is too long, I know. However date is most commonly in front on XDA. This should also clear up for the WM/WP users that this is not for them. An SGS user will still spot the "SGS" and know it is for them. Non-SGS users might have to read the thread to see that is is "For Samsung Galaxy S devices only!"

We need something better, but removing Android from the title isn't it, I think.

Hopefully proper sub-forums, as listed here will make the OS portion not needed.

Then phone types would make sense at the start, followed by OS version.

Finally, I was suggesting the date at the end more as a general style that would flow better. Just like for the most part, we go from least specific to most specific when identifying things (for example, Android 1.6) it would make sense that the name would come before any version or date specifier.

While I realize this would break with the tradition some user's have started, at best it is applied inconsistently so standardizing in a well known and defined way seems like a good thing.

Chainfire · Jan 24, 2011

It seems indeed they are coming.

Let us then, for the few days we still have to wait, use the suggested format of simply adding the OS name and version in front of the release ?

Guardian_Bob · Jan 24, 2011

Chainfire said:
It seems indeed they are coming.

Let us then, for the few days we still have to wait, use the suggested format of simply adding the OS name and version in front of the release ?

That seems more than fair.

People may want to hold off posting until the subforums show up, to keep the mods from having too big of a headache.

hilaireg · Jan 24, 2011

Great initiative Chainfire.

Once we have a reasonable naming convention, efforts will be required to ensure that it is adhered to.

NotATreoFan · Jan 24, 2011

We can set the App forums to require prefixes. Much like the optional "Is this a question?" adds [Q] at the start of a title.

Chainfire · Jan 24, 2011

NotATreoFan said:
We can set the App forums to require prefixes. Much like the optional "Is this a question?" adds [Q] at the start of a title.

Yeah I think we should.

We'll let the committee decide on final subject format, and then have it implemented, I guess.

ralflau · Apr 21, 2011

Good idea.

TRusselo · Apr 21, 2011

there should be a set of prefixes to choose from, at the beginning of the "create thread title" in "create new post".
you can only use from standard list and no [ ] allowed in titles, custom prefixes with { }

XDA admins would also need to run script on thread titles to replace ALL current [ ] with { } for all prefixes not in list previously mentioned.

not terribly hard, would help a bunch.

thesitter · Oct 28, 2011

nice nice nice

Topics

Topics

Mandatory Naming Convention

Chainfire

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Guardian_Bob

Senior Member

pandapaul

Member

Chainfire

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

missparker76

Senior Member

Chainfire

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Guardian_Bob

Senior Member

Chainfire

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Guardian_Bob

Senior Member

hilaireg

Moderator Emeritus

NotATreoFan

Moderator Emeritus

Chainfire

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

ralflau

Senior Member

TRusselo

Inactive Recognized Developer

thesitter

New member

Similar threads

Top Liked Posts

New posts

**Mandatory Naming Convention**

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Senior Member

Member

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Senior Member

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Senior Member

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Senior Member

Moderator Emeritus

Moderator Emeritus

Moderator Emeritus / Senior Recognized Developer

Senior Member

Inactive Recognized Developer

New member

Similar threads

Top Liked Posts

Mandatory Naming Convention