Re: I-D ACTION:draft-daboo-sieve-include-03.txt (fwd)

["Nigel Swinson" <[e-mail]>]

> It would only be a no-op if the default namespace is the global namespace
> ;-) Unless you guys are already deeply along the path of a single
> namespace, I believe a per-file namespace is less likely to cause
> confusing results.

FWIW I totally agree.  I wonder if even though the variables spec puts it that way, it would be ok to interpret "Global" as "File scope" and add text to the include draft to permit this.  Indeed it's only with the include extension that the possibility of anything wider than File Scope exists.  I'm also a PHP user and I also think they've done a pretty good job with their :global specifer.

> A :local modifier would do the trick. The text in the drafts should be
> more explicit about there being a single global namespace for all scripts.

I think a :local modifier is a bit of a waste... you'd likely only use it AFTER you'd spent ages debugging an awkward problem.  I'd much rather we helped them avoid the awkward problem in the first place and hence my support for a :superglobal type modifier.

Nigel