I don't know how to make myself more clear. I haven't been talking about entire documents. Some of the links I provided discuss tests conducted on entire documents. That is not relevant to this discussion. Please cut out the pedantry. It's aggravating and doesn't contribute to the discussion. It comes of as you trying to score "points" in a discussion for being more "technically correct".
Example B:
> [ChrisA]
>>
>> Are English paragraphs hard to read because tokens like "HTML" and "IBM" are in all-caps?
>
>
> Acronyms are a different use case for all caps. We can discuss the value proposition for those in another thread if you'd like.
> I will say that I read my share of research papers where acronyms tend to see heavy use and, yes; it can harm readability.
Initialisms (that aren't acronyms) carry information: you read them
out letter by letter rather than as a word (ignoring phonograms etc).
Constants carry information by being in all caps also.
I'm not talking about acronyms OR initialisms **rolls eyes extremely hard**. If you want to discuss whether HttpClient or HTTPClient is more acceptable, go start another thread. I've already responded to this.
> [ChrisA]
>>
>> Are you going to appeal to Google to have *their* style guide changed too?
>
>
> That's comparing apples and oranges. Python is an open language with an ideas forum about how to improve things. Google generally isn't open to my suggestions. Any given company I work with is much more likely to enforce PEP-8 than Google's style guides. As far as I know, getting Google to adopt a given idea isn't a precondition for the Python community accepting said idea.
>
Both documents are specific to an original context, but have been
adopted elsewhere. If your company has adopted PEP 8, that's your
company's decision. It would equally be your company's decision to use
the Google style guide, or a modified version of either, or a hybrid
of both. If PEP 8 changes, will your company instantly change its
policy to be "use this new version"? They don't have to.
This conversation isn't going to go anywhere if you ignore half of what I write.
> [ChrisA]
>>
>> treat PEP 8 as a guideline
>
> Again, that's not always an option.
>
Again, that's not PEP 8's problem.
It's my problem. It's a problem I have to deal with. It's a problem that doesn't need to be a problem. It's a problem that can be solved by modifying PEP-8. I don't even know what you mean by something being "PEP 8's problem".
If you can't contribute to the discussion in a meaningful way, then why even respond?