Re: [dita] namespaces goals

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@innodata-isogen.com>]

I continue to feel strongly that the class attribute should be 
associated with it's own namespace as discussed in my latest post in the 
Namespace resolution thread.

I think that requiring just this one namespace is consistent with all of 
the 1.0 goals Erik outlined.

I would like to see namespaces associated with packages--I don't see 
must risk here and it's the only way so far identified to handle package 
name conflicts, but I think we could endure not doing them in 1.0.

I do not see a need to do any namespace qualification of element type 
names and attributes (other than the class attribute) in the working 
DTDs and schemas.

Cheers,

E.
-- 
W. Eliot Kimber
Professional Services
Innodata Isogen
9390 Research Blvd, #410
Austin, TX 78759
(512) 372-8122

eliot@innodata-isogen.com
www.innodata-isogen.com