in reply to Namespace for libwv wrapper class?

I don't like the current situation with a lot of different toplevel namespaces. I looked around as far as I could and didn't find anything this could really fit it. Personally I think it would be sensible if such modules - not just yours, but those dealing with any type of file, esp those produced by office suites - were placed under a Document:: root namespace. That would make yours something like Document::Word::View. The current Spreadsheet:: modules would fit in there nicely too, as would the PDF:: stuff.

Makeshifts last the longest.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Namespace for libwv wrapper class?
by chanio (Priest) on Jun 22, 2003 at 16:35 UTC
    I am not experienced in this CPAN logic but I believe that Microsoft has left clear that they should be considered as a 'different' namespace :).

    That is, they are never subscribing to any standard that they don't create or modify in a non-standard way. Don't you think?

    What ever the logic that might apply to CPAN modules, the best way to manage all would be to reflect reality.

      That doesn't make any sense. It is not up to Microsoft to name this module, nor is the library behind it written by them. Why in the world would we adopt the same practices we dislike for things we create just because they happen to be in some way tangential to Microsoft?

      Makeshifts last the longest.