[I missed this in an earlier response until Michael's more recent post
reminded me of it.]
"Eric Bresie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So please indicate your preference:
> >
> > 1) SAX::*::* or SAX*::*
> >
> > 2) no-sub-types or sub-types
> Since SAX = Simple API for XML...should this be
>
> XML::SAX (with all possible combinations you previously described)
>
> Or was the intent to use it outside of XML or are you concerned
> about the level of module naming you mentioned?
Yes, the levels. The Perl module naming gurus encourage new
top-levels to break up large clusters of second-level module names,
and strongly discourage three-level names and would probably lob bombs
at us if we tried for four!
-- Ken
