I'm inclined to agree with Glen here on a couple of points. 1) The exact form of the namespacing mechanism isn't so important as the fact that there is a mechanism in place. While not everyone will use namespaces (and to be honest that should be seen as a requirement, that any namespace proposal should account for that 90% case that Tab laid out earlier where namespaces are an encumbrance) I think that the sooner such a namespacing mechanism be put into place, the sooner that it can be adopted by the 10% who do in fact have significant need for namespaces (semantic web being the biggest use case I can think of at the top of my head).
2) I tend to distrust public registries - they add a layer of complexity and often are underutilized when finally implemented. I'm more inclined to see something like a namespace bundle or package that can be written in JSON in some kind of standardized format. Node's *npm* might be a good model there. This creates a set of bound key prefixes for a given site that can in turn be associated with corresponding "namespaced globals" and extended HTML elements. I'd have to think about this a bit, but I could see this both as a way to allow for large organizations to manage its widget usage within web apps. Kurt Cagle Principle Evangelist, Semantic Technologies Avalon Consulting, LLC kurt.ca...@gmail.com, personal cag...@avalonconsult.com, business 443-837-8725 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Dimitri Glazkov <dglaz...@google.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:05 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.bars...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> >> Dimitri - if someone wants to provide input (f.ex. requirements ) for >> this API, should they add them to the above bug (or do you recommend else)? >> > > Yep. That's a good place. > > :DG< >