Expand acronyms FQN and FQCN

[quaff]

We should insist on using either one to keep consistency, FQCN is more common in the Java ecosystem.

[sbrannen]

I'd argue that we should follow best practices for technical writing by avoiding the use of undefined acronyms.

In other words, we should never use either FQN or FQCN without first defining what is meant by the acronym used, and if we are not going to use the term or acronym multiple times in the same paragraph/section/Javadoc, we should just omit the use of the acronym altogether.

Would you like to revise this PR accordingly?

[quaff]

we should follow best practices for technical writing by avoiding the use of undefined acronyms.

Agreed totally.

Would you like to revise this PR accordingly?

I'd like to, do you mean replacing all FQCN with fully-qualified class name ?

[sbrannen]

I'd like to,

👍

do you mean replacing all FQCN with fully-qualified class name ?

Yes, when it's used in text/Javadoc/comments.

When it's used in a code/syntax example, I usually go with something like <fully-qualified class name>.<method-name> instead of FQN.methodName.

[quaff]

I'd like to,

👍

do you mean replacing all FQCN with fully-qualified class name ?

Yes, when it's used in text/Javadoc/comments.

When it's used in a code/syntax example, I usually go with something like <fully-qualified class name>.<method-name> instead of FQN.methodName.

@sbrannen done.

[sbrannen]

This has been merged into main in 019c0b1 and polished in 717b972.

Thanks