+1 Brian
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Brian Gerkey <
gerkey@osrfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Advait Jain <advaitjain@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I agree with Shaun.
>>
>> My personal preference is for the message name to reflect the message data
>> type as opposed to what the message is used for.
>>
>> The topic name can then tell us whether the message is being used for
>> humidity or pressure.
>
> While that approach can make it easier to develop certain tools, it
> runs contrary to what we've been trying to do with standard message
> formats. The message definition tells you as much about the semantics
> of the data as it does about the syntax. I think that we're better
> off using semantically typed messages wherever possible.
>
> brian.
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
--
Lorenz Mösenlechner | moesenle@in.tum.de
Technische Universität München | Karlstraße 45
80335 München | Germany
http://ias.cs.tum.edu/ | Tel: +49 (89) 289-26910
(text/plain)