New namespaces in normative prose of amended Part1 are inherited by Part 4

[MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)]

> #95, #99, #113, #115, #117, #121, #130, #132, #134, #171,
> #173, #197 in the Part1 FPDAM1 make *normative* prose 
> use new namespace names.  (Since I have reviewed only half, 
> I believe that I will find more.)  At present, the Part 4 FPDAM1 says 
> nothing about the prose changes, and thus inherit them.
> 
> I think that we should copy normative prose from Part1 to Part4 only to 
> use old namespace names.

If my proposal in my mail "Dropping unnecessary occurrences of namespace names" 
(http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/2010-February/001152.html) is 
accepted, then we can drop #173 from the above list.

Dropping unnecessary occurrences of namespace names would also work for 
(#301 in the Part FDAM draft, #256 in the Part4 FDAM draft) pair and
(#302 in the Part FDAM draft, #257 in the Part4 FDAM draft) pair.  In 
other words, we could rewrite #301 and #302 in the Part1 FDAM draft by
dropping namespace names and remove #256 and #257 from the Part4 FDAM
draft.  However, in these two cases, the current drafts would work.


Cheers,
Makoto