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

Comment From: 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 ?

Comment From: 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.

Comment From: 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.

Comment From: sbrannen

This has been merged into main in 019c0b1d4e59c6f158c16b7fc6f7cecd6e96e89d and polished in 717b972f88c13ad774e533d1571a5668971d779f.

Thanks