Acronyms - Current list
We have turned on a feature across the site that adds the meaning of an acronym as a hover. It's to lower the barrier of entry just a tad for those getting to know Qt.
Acronym features can be annoying and distracting to our regular users if used too much, so if it's a too common acronym (API, SDK etc.) it will just have to do without.
Here is the current list:
QSA -> Qt Script for Applications
QCS -> Qt Contributors' Summit
QAIM -> QAbstractItemModel
QNAM -> QNetworkAccessManager
QAPM -> QAbstractProxyModel
QSFPM -> QSortFilterProxyModel
QGV -> QGraphicsView
QGS -> QGraphicsScene
QSS -> QtStyleSheet
MTM -> MultiThreadedMode
QMI -> QModelIndex
QPMI -> QPersistentModelIndex
QGI -> QGraphicsItem
QGO -> QGraphicsObject
QGW -> QGraphicsWidget
QSP -> QSharedPointer
IANAL -> I Am Not A Lawyer (meaning: do not to take this opinion as professional legal advice)
IIRC -> If I Recall Correctly
LLVM -> Low Level Virtual Machine
YMMV -> Your Mileage May Vary (meaning: It may work differently in your situation, or be different in your experience)
Feel free to suggest more - or less :)
I always thought QSS stood for QtStyleSheet.
It does now! (thanks)
What about thinks, that are typically used here, but which people, not long in forums perhaps don't know, like
AFAIK, IMHO, ...?
bq. AFAIK, IMHO, …?
yes that's a good idea in my opinion because lots of people are not native english speaking.
I remember a long long time ago i asked on a forum what "noob" meant. That was really a noob question ;)
What about RTFM?
Yeah, or STFW and GIYF.
AFAIK, IMHO could be nice to have in there, let me think about it for a bit.
As for RTFM and its siblings I'm trending towards a something entirely different. In other large forums they sometimes have a policy to avoid the use of those entirely, to promote a newbie friendly atmosphere. This if from the Ubuntu forums:
bq. If you wish to remind a user to use search tools or other resources when they have asked a question you feel is basic or common, please be polite. Any replies for help that contain language disrespectful towards the user asking the question are unacceptable and will not be tolerated. This includes things like STFU, RTFM, and LMGTFY as well as the obvious forms of disrespect. (http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy)
I'm on board with that, let's leave them for darker places on the interwebs :)
LMGTFY, I have to admit, is something I use from time to time. But maybe I should change my ways?
I actually meant it more like a joke, I usually just point to the appropriate documentation is a case like that.
[quote author="loladiro" date="1308738172"]I actually meant it more like a joke, I usually just point to the appropriate documentation is a case like that.[/quote]
Yep, got that :) Leads to an interesting topic never the less.
The discussion on if RTFM and the likes are acceptable on DevNet, has been split off into a "separate topic":http://developer.qt.nokia.com/forums/viewthread/7059/ .
So, actually those are two lists: one of Qt-more-or-less-related acronyms, and another one for forum jargon.
Qt: QMI (QModelIndex), QPMI (QPersistentModelIndex), QNR (QNetworkReply / Request, I think it's clarified by the context), QGI (QGraphicsItem), QGO (QGraphicsObject), QGW (QGraphicsWidget), QSOFooBar (QStyleOptionFooBar), QSP (QSharedPointer).
Jargon: BTW, YMMV, FYI, FWIW, BTDT, HTH, IANAL, IIRC.
[quote author="Andre" date="1308746190"]Split notification:
The discussion on if RTFM and the likes are acceptable on DevNet, has been split off into a "separate topic":http://developer.qt.nokia.com/forums/viewthread/7059/ .[/quote]
Goodness. I also was suggesting it in a joking way. Glad it did spur some discussion, though. In retrospect, I think it is a very good line of conversation that needed to be made.
@peppe: thanks, added most of them, original post updated
I've tried something new with IANAL and YMMV, useful at all or over the top?
[quote author="mariusg" date="1308778722"]
I've tried something new with IANAL and YMMV, useful at all or over the top?[/quote]
I like it. I don't think it's over the top at all. Especially on a more abstract one like YMMV.
[quote author="mariusg" date="1308778722"]I've tried something new with IANAL and YMMV, useful at all or over the top?[/quote]
Useful, I'd say.
Just an idea for people not knowing the meaning of an acronym.
If we could use a combobox (or other way of choosing) in the editor to select one.
And when it is placed in the text it is actually a link to this acronym page or a tooltip with the full meaning.
What do you all think of that?
you mean like AFAIK will have a tool tip and also a lik to "this wkitionary page":http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/AFAIK ?
Or just a link to the devnet page, which we can control ourselves.
Something like this "AFAIK ":http://developer.qt.nokia.com/forums/viewthread/6963/P15/#43354
But without the extra text between 
Edit :The idea is to get an easy way to find/get one and for those that read it can click on to know whait means
The problem is that acronyms are often considered a pest.
Here is a "link to a similar thread on another platform ":http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=2924&idForum=4&lp=ende&lang=de
Watch out for the comment on Monty Python's "Just the Words"
It brings it somehow to a point. For people not used to the acronym it is obscuring the meaning of a whole sentence.
The idea of having the extended text when hovering over an acronym is certainly a help. Why not having a button which allows displaying the whole text with all acronyms extended.
This helps the people typing text. They may use acronyms to speed up typing, if it really does.
The reader may choose the learning lesson with acronyms or the easy reading.
BTW acronyms require proper spelling otherwise they might be completely useless.
bq. Why not having a button which allows displaying the whole text with all acronyms extended.
That's a very good and yet simple idea.
Picking the acronym from a list or combobox makes sure the "spelling" is consistent.
I'm curious to hear what Marius and the other enthousiasts think of these ideas
How about adding i18n and l10n? I found those very strange when I did not know what they stood for (and even then). i18n is really hard to interpret as "i followed by 18 characters followed by an n" and that is hard to match to internationalization;)
PS: l10n is for localization for those that are wondering:-)
[quote author="Tobias Hunger" date="1310028030"]How about adding i18n and l10n? I found those very strange when I did not know what they stood for (and even then). i18n is really hard to interpret as "i followed by 18 characters followed by an n" and that is hard to match to internationalization;)
PS: l10n is for localization for those that are wondering:-)[/quote]
Good ones, added now. And I learned something new.
[quote author="Eddy" date="1309620673"]I'm curious to hear what Marius and the other enthousiasts think of these ideas[/quote]
To make a "v2.0" of this basic acronym feature is indeed a good idea, the goal is to lower the threshold to get started (or involved) by adding some context to tribal Qt language and similar. To avoid the step of getting a hover tooltip would help I guess. Koahnig writes words of wisdom though, the pest factor must be very low.
"Acronyms v2.0" is not planned or scheduled yet, so feel free to evolve the idea even further. Thanks!
bump ... AFAIK is still missing :-)
FYI: If you're using an older version of Internet Explorer the acronym feature is disabled.