"The Namespace Discussion" on ISO/IEC 29500

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

(Not wearing my convenor hat)

First, the beginning of this document is "Proposal 1 and proposal 2 are
not mutually exclusive -- indeed, if proposal 1 is accepted, then it may
be desirable if proposal 2 was also accepted."

where Proposal 1 is:

	To change the namespace for the strict schemas for Part 1.
	The new namespace should no longer contain a year.

and Proposal 2 is:

	To change the conformance attribute to support the attribute
	including version information as part of the 
	conformance information.

I see two options for combining Proposal 1 and proposal 2.  

Option 1: To change the namespace for the strict schemas 
and change the conformance attribute for both conformance 
classes.

Option 2: To change the namespace for the strict schemas 
and change the conformance attribute for the conformance 
class "transitional" only.

Second, I do not think that Proposal 1 without Proposal 2 provides any 
mechanisms for distinguishing the first edition Ecma 376 OOXML and 
"transitional" of 29500.

Cheers,
-- 
Makoto <EB2M-MRT at asahi-net.or.jp>