Talk:Useful space principle

Frankly, I don't quite know what's "useful space principle". Shouldn't it be rather "Principle of useful space"; seems more natural to me? Duja 17:14, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

It's "useful space principle" -- possibly because then the acronym is USP, whereas Principle of Useful Space would abbreviate as PUS, an unfortunate acronym. I've written an article that I linked to the Glossary -- which might be too high in the hierarchy and I invite opinions. Xlmvp 18:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Excellent contribution Xlmvp! JocK 19:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, JocK. I'll take it every time, but I might not have been clear. Should USP be in the Glossary, or should it be subsumed under some other heading, such as Bidding Systems? Do we have a consensus on guidelines regarding glossary entries? Xlmvp 20:00, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the glossary is currently slightly cluttered. No, we don't have the guidelines yet. Maybe we can discuss them there?

I'm guessing that I'm replying to Duja, but this is for anyone interested in the issue. I'll continue at Glossary Talk. Xlmvp 20:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

There should be a brief definition of USP in the glossary, with a link to the article, as you have done (well). My only suggestion for substantive improvement (which I may take on myself sometime) is to mention relays. However, according to our naming conventions, shouldn't this be Useful space principle? Matchups 21:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC) (P.S. I hope I haven't offended anybody by refactoring this conversation.)

It should definitely be lowercase. As for the word order, you're right—USP order is common and used by Rubens himself. (Altho' it can be easily rendered as "a quite useful principle for moving through space" >:) ). Duja 08:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)