RE: Editorial comments for Part 1, section 1-3

>OK, so ignoring for the moment any logistical issues over
>depending on a 
>CR-level namespaces draft, I think that where we say qualified name we 
>often mean expanded name.  Do you agree?  

Yup (and logistic issues may indeed be hard to ignore)

>I think this should
>be checked 
>with the WG if we decide to make any changes, as I think it's 
>a bit beyond 
>editorial.  Thanks.

While it does seem editorial in nature, I agree that such things from
now go on the issues list for WG review. In general, I think this
applies to pretty much any change given where we are.

Thank you,

Henrik