CPAN stores distributions under author subdirectories. But the module namespace is done separately and reflects the function of the module. In the case of the MARC:: namespace, I think Ed Summers is the only one who has remained involved since the beginning (back in the 1990's). Had we used names at the start, it would have been BBIRTH::MARC (which would have been confusing to absolutely everyone even back then) since I uploaded the first release to CPAN.
Also, uppercase MARC:: is the preferred CPAN practice for an acronym of this sort. Compare to existing module names like CGI, DBI, ODBC, ASP, and PDL. -bill On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 20:39 +0100, Frédéric DEMIANS wrote: > > butting in an interesting discussion ... > > Thanks for joining the discussion. > > > Would Org::Demians::MARC::Record ( or Tamil::MARC::Record ) be very > > wrong, unless you aim to provide the ultimate collection of MARC > > modules that would make all the others obsolete ? > > Yes, I aim to... In the Java world, I would have name it > fr.tamil.marc... I'm not sure it's the usage in CPAN. And there is this > suggestion to stay under MARC:: umbrella. > > > Moose is great and I love it, but it's not forever ... in a few years > > we'll use Elk or something else, and you might want to port your > > modules ... > > I have other plan for the future...
