On Saturday 06 July 2002 22:17, D. Hageman wrote: > On Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Robin Berjon wrote: > > Given that it is a DOM wrapper, why not simply XML::TEILite? > > I guess the only reason why I didn't go with XML::TEILite is that I > thought as TEI becomes more established that more people would be > interested in adding additional tools. I guess one can't really predict > the future and if later this prediction becomes true and people do such a > thing and more 'group'ing namespace can be considered then. I am okay > with the namespace XML::TEILite.
As Tim pointed out recently, some top level namespaces such as Apache:: or XML:: are so generic that three-level names make sense. Thus, people wishing to develop addition TEI tools would use XML::TEILite as their root namespace. The same discussion occurred with the same conclusion when the perl-xml list was debating whether to use XML::SAX::* or have a SAX:: top level namespace. -- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- for hire: http://robin.berjon.com/ "I will not teach Plato. I shall teach nothing but the truth." -- Rudolf Carnap
