Hi, Inspired by Jean-Louis question about what to put to namespace detail, I would be interested learning about rationale of name of the namespace detail (sometimes details or impl too). Recently, I've participated in a very interesting discussion, on ACCU members mailing list, about prefixes and suffixes like Base or _base nad Impl or _impl, as misused, irrelevant and confusing, meaningless, etc. For example, how to properly name elements of PIMPL idiom and similar. During the discussion I suggested that 'detail' is a good name for namespace dedicated to implementation details being not a part of public interface of a component. I got answer that it as the same issues (it's meaningless) as Impl etc. It raised some questions for myself, being interested in improving my craft, I would like to learn better about the name of namespace detail. I use detail name myself. Any better names for bucket with implementation details? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org