Re: [office-metadata] Re: Updated example

[Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@gmail.com>]

On Jun 21, 2007, at 2:10 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:

>> What namespace it is in doesn't matter that much to me, but I do 
>> think the "Reference" class ought to be fairly generic.
>>
> +1

...

>> Finally, if the odf prefix is meant to relate on to the package, then 
>> we should change the suggest prefix:
>>
>>     odfp?
>>     package?
>>
>> ... I don't know.
>>
> I'm easy but I do think we need to keep a clean separation between odf 
> for ODF stuff and other things. Just so that it is always clear which 
> is which.

Exactly. So then perhaps we need a "pkg" namespace to cover most of 
what is currently "odf." This namespace is reserved for describing the 
contents of a file archive.

But I wonder, then, if we don't keep the content-related stuff in the 
separate namespace? E.g.:

	odf:Element
	odf:Citation
	odf:Reference
	...

???

Would seem sensible to have pkg:hasPart, but weird to see pkg:Element 
or pkg:Citation?

Bruce