Drop namespace support

[StephanHoyer]

@maranomynet I just thought if we can drop namespace support.

I do it the following way

// define translation
messages = {
  'foo.bar.baz': 'forbarbaz'
}

// usage
t('foo.bar.baz')

I think it can do all thing you can do with namespaces. It would simplify and for sure fasten the computation of the translation.

What do you think?

[StephanHoyer]

I find it also simpler in terms of maintenance since you can find unused translations more easily by matching the strings.

[StephanHoyer]

an other option would be to flatten the messages object during initialisation.

[StephanHoyer]

@maranomynet would you mind reviewing my pr and annotate or merge it.

[StephanHoyer]

this way you can also uglify your translation-keys with -d and -define-from-module option of uglify.js. Haven't tested though

[maranomynet]

I'm inclined to like this because it makes things faster and quite a bit simpler.

The main use-case I see for supporting namespaces, is that it makes composing large translation objects somewhat easier – but that minor benefit is hardly worth the added complexity. This is supposed to be a micro-library after all.

[maranomynet]

I might have been too hasty npm publishing 0.3.0 just now, but #16 won't have any functional impact on the code, so it can wait until the next release anyway.