RE: EXProc - editorial: use different prefixes for File Utils and XPath functions

> > I noticed that the specifications at EXProc.org use the same
namespace
> > prefix for the File Utils steps and the XPath extension functions:
"pxf"
> 
> > I think that for reducing the confusion of the readers/users, it
would
> > be better to use a different prefix for either the File Utils stuff
or
> > the XPath extension functions.
> 
>   Well, that's a tricky one.  If we get too much different namespaces,
> people will just be confused.  If we do not have enough, things will
> be less maintainable.  Personally, I think it is better to have too
> less than too much, but that's just my own point of view.

Oh, I agree with that. But I was referring to using the same prefix for
two different namespace URIs in the EXProc specifications. The File
Utils steps and the XPath extension functions are currently in two
different namespaces, but they are both referred to using the same
prefix "pfx" in the text.

Regards,
Vojtech

Received on Thursday, 22 April 2010 11:11:28 UTC