Date:         Wed, 26 Jan 2005 08:59:50 -0500
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         "Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Unifying MODS and MADS namespace  (Re: [MODS] merits of a type
              library)
Comments: To: Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

It's time for some separate sub-threads, I think.

From: "Bruce D'Arcus" <[log in to unmask]>
> Why should MODS and MADS be in separate namespaces to begin with?

Again let me reiterate this example I gave yesterday:  mods and mads <name>
are defined differently, so in the  single-namespace approach you'd need
different names for 'name' e.g.  <modsName> and <madsName>.

(Not necessarily a compelling reason, but a significant consideration I
think.)

--Ray