- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:19:05 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- Cc:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1998 holstege@mathling.com changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED ------- Additional Comments From holstege@mathling.com 2005-09-30 15:19 ------- I'm satisfied with this resolution, although perhaps Michael Dyck is suggesting we reopen it (although it looks like a distinct issue to me). In answer to the question he poses (why allow more than one module per ns?) the short answer is because function namespaces and physical partitioning have nothing to do with one another. If your only choice is between putting all 20000 lines of XQuery into a single file or inventing random distinct namespaces just so you can partition the physical file (which will drive all the clients of that module completely spare trying to remember which function is in which namespace), you have no sane solution to a basic development issue. The current design also has the salutary effect of allowing one to hide all the "internal functions" in one physical file, have a "api library" import that set, and only advertise the api library to the world. Thus: function export, without any special mechanism for function export.
Received on Friday, 30 September 2005 15:19:07 UTC