Lists Home |
Date Index |
> > > Just out of curiosity, if we one day Microsoft decided to ship a SAX
> > > implementation in the .NET Framework wouldn't this clash with the
> > > names you have chosen? Perhaps we need some namespace naming guidelines
> > > for .NET libraries.
> > So, are you going to ship a SAX implementation?
> > System.Xml.Sax would be the most logical namespace, and I was using
> > it as I was pretty sure MS had abandoned SAX.
> > So, if third parties supply basic/system type libraries,
> > what namespaces should they use - if MS claims sole ownership
> > to the System namespace?
> I always thought it was suggested to use a less-generic name in front of the
> generic name, something like System.Xml.Karl.Sax or something.
> Personally, I would have chosen something more along the lines of
Well, I admit to being ignorant on namespace allocation policies.
I am not emotionally tied to the one I am currently using,
but I would like to use one that makes sense, and I would
like to follow some established guidelines, if there are any.
So, readers, please enlighten me.
As far as OpenSax vs. Sax is concerned: AFAIK, SAX was always distributed
as a public domain specification/framework (not even Open Source). So that
is one name the community should be able to use as is, without any prefix.