Quoting <thiago.macieira at intel.com> (on 2015-01-27 16:15:47): > On Tuesday 27 January 2015 14:01:06 Lankswert, Patrick wrote: > > That is a good point. The naming convention should reflect the open source > > project and not necessarily the consortium. > > Here's another idea: let's just use "iot" for C++ namespace, for include path > (/usr/include/iot/*) and for C prefix.
Please, don't get cocky. Use your own namespace (/usr/include/iotivity) and be nice to other players, which IMHO is best for the adoption of IoTivity as a standard. -- J. Victor Martins
