Steven Noels wrote:
> As far as namespace management is concerned, you are absolutely correct - we should > agree on a standard URI scheme. And yet still, there are NO assumptions/rules > whatsoever that a namespace URI needs to resolve to an actual internet > resource/webpage/Schema/etc... We have agreed on the cocoon based namespace schemes: http://apache.org/xsp/${logicsheetName}/${version} This keeps the Apache.org branding, specifies the contract (this is an XSP logicsheet), the specific name and version. Versions are in the ${major}.${minor}.${micro} format and not date format (what if there are multiple releases in a year?). It is important to respect this naming scheme--as it is not Cocoon specific and will allow AxKit to supply an implementation of the same logicsheet. This allows the same XSP to be used accross all environments (unless of course the page embeds language specific code). > As far as the website is concerned however, this is somehow common practice in > xml.apache.org-land: > > consider http://xml.apache.org/xerces-j/index.html vs > http://xml.apache.org/xerces2-j/index.html, or even worse > http://xml.apache.org/soap/index.html vs http://xml.apache.org/axis/index.html (which > is a tad more politics, but anyhow). SOAP vs. Axis: They are two different projects, and therefore have unique address space. Xerces vs. Xerces2: Yes, it is the same violation. > I don't think we should alienate the existing (and loyal) cocoon1 user base, also. :) Honestly, Cocoon is Cocoon, and version 2 is the now currently supported version. We want to encourage new users to use the latest and greatest. We *should* support Cocoon version 1.x users with migration strategies and tips and tricks on how the new version makes things easier/better for them. -- "Those who would trade liberty for temporary security deserve neither" - Benjamin Franklin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
