<tt>gtg990h@mail.gatech.edu wrote on Mon, 2005-03-07 at 21:32 -0500, :</tt> <tt>> The biggest thing about D-VFS, which I think has not been considered > sufficiently, is that it introduces a new, overlapping namespace for files. That > makes D-VFS more than just a "desktop thing"; namespace design influences the > whole system. </tt> <tt>gtg990h@mail.gatech.edu wrote on Tue, 2005-03-08 at 11:37:07 -0500, : > If you consider name unification to be a good thing, then D-VFS is broken from > the beginning. By design, it creates a second parallel namespace. >From an > interface point of view, two vs four namespaces is no big deal. One > vs two is an enormous deal. </tt> <tt>I'm missing some point here.  How does D-VFS introduce a new namespace?  What namespace is being fragmented?</tt> <tt>I was under the impression that D-VFS uses URLs to identify documents.  Are not URLs the grand federation of internet namespaces?</tt> <tt>chas</tt>