pgRouting SQL coding standard for documents and examples

[sanak]

PostGIS documents seem to be written by a certain rule (ST_XyzAbc and upper case SQL words .etc).
Should we follow the SQL coding standard except pgRouting function name (pgr_xyzAbc .etc) ?

[robe2]

Probably not worth the effort. The reason PostGIS does that is to satisfy SQL/MM convention (and then we said might as well make all our functions that way even if they aren't SQL/MM to minimize on confusion). Since your functions aren't SQL/MM defined, you have no precedence for it. You just need to be consistent within your own functions/documentation which I think you are.

[sanak]

Okay. Thanks for confirmation.
(I forgot that SQL/MM is OGC standard...)

I found some inconsistencies in pgr_alphaShape and pgr_pointsAsPolygon documents.
So, I will keep this status as opened for another function documents for a while.

[woodbri]

I think that we roughly were mimicing the postgis style because we are dependent on postgis so again just trying to be consistent. I don't think we are rigid about this or have even documented that we have a style. We might want to add a style guide statement to the development standards docs.

[sanak]

@woodbri Okay. Thanks for comment.

[cvvergara]

Eventually we need a pgRouting standard on function names:

• when to use acronyms
• when to use words
• how to indicate in the function name which "family" of functions it belongs to.

But I think also it will need a full review of how the family of functions are formed
A for versions 2.x all new families of functions are proposed, then before 3.0 this can be reviewed and make the standard.

[cvvergara]

#400 is related