I thought it was closer to convention to have it the way I proposed. This
is why I said "I see no other way to **not** drastically break with
namespace convention".

Regardless, the reason that exported and non exported names were in
different namespaces stemmed from the original proposal's idea to establish
namespaces in an export-declaration, for exported names. I was not aware
that this was such a horrific break from convention that the only way I
could have come up with it was that I was scared of my proposal being
rejected if it did not break with convention.

Thank you for all of your helpful advice, genuinely, and on the off-chance
that you, or anyone else on this public mailing list, decide(s) to take a
look, I have attached the (near-)final draft paper.