Subject: Re: datatypeNamespace => datatypeLibrary?
> 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
Powered by eList eXpress LLC