This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 84 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 84 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.
These are valid criticisms, but in practice they are not a problem. The domain-based naming system has the big advantage of being simple and good enough. It works well enough it practice.Rather than establish our own authority we could try to leverage an existing one, as Java does. com.microsoft.foo.bar is reserved for the owner of the microsoft.com DNS name. This may not be the most suitable level of entity for an authorization system. The example above could either refer to the foo.bar module of microsoft.com, or the bar module of foo.microsoft.com, which for Microsoft Corporation may not be such a problem, but for other hosts that conflict may be unacceptable. The naming is also not actually enforced by any of the Java tools - nothing is stopping me from distributing my own com.microsoft modules.
But not over the net. You can't do that reliably in general or even usually, unless the library in question is from a stable well known place. "Versionitus" requires that testing needs to be done before you know your code works with the library.Now consider that, unlike Java, we actually write reusable code, and share modules with third parties. So Acme.com may import Bob's ListLibrary.