Re: datatypeNamespace => datatypeLibrary?

[James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>]

> For the sake of discussion, will a group of datatypes always be adequately
> referred to as a 'library'?

I think so.  Other possible names:

datatypeCatalog
datatypeDictionary
datatypeService
datatypeProvider
datatypeCollection

> I like the idea of not dragging the confusion of namespaces into the fray.

Me too.

> In regard to NOT renaming ns to namespace, the phrase "terseness is of
> minimal importance" comes to mind. Generally, I feel that, within reason,
> users will be better served by a recognizable name for an element,
> attribute, etc., rather than just an abbreviation. By "within reason" I
mean
> we don't have to take the terseness-minimal-importance argument to XMI's
> extremes!

I could go either way on this argument.  I definitely agree with the general
policy of avoiding abbreviations.  I believe abbreviations should be
restricted to cases where the abbreviation is very well established in
XML/HTML practice. The fact that "namespace" is very visibly abbreviated to
"ns" in every namespace declaration is a strong argument for our doing the
same.

James