A "point" is an abstract element of another abstraction:
a "Space".  Smalltalk traditionally realizes these abstractions
as a 2-dimensional euclidean space specifically to make writing
axis alligned, non-scalable, widgets easily implementable on a
pixel-mapped display.  Abstract algebraic concepts, were not a
concern.  Part of making this stuff easy, was naming this abstraction:

	'Point'
	
Now I'm going to posit that a short class name benefits more as
class refs go up.  (Actually, this arguments applies to globals,
but untill we got better namespacing...)

The normal usage of a class ref is for instantiation of said class.
However, in Point's case, we have an "operator" for creation, @
So calling this class 'Point' (instead of something longer) is
of lesser benefit.

The other class name I'd go after with the same argument is Interval.
It really should be called ArithmeticSequence, and there are
practiacally no refs to it because of #to:do: & #to:by:do:

-- Mike Klein