Xesam meta-meta-data spec needs attention.
phreedom.stdin at gmail.com
Wed May 2 21:40:41 EEST 2007
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 15:46:15 jamie wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 14:13 +0200, Sebastian Trüg wrote:
> > Hmm, so now you ignore RDF?
> > Don't get me wrong, it is your project, so in the end it is your
> > decision. I am just a little confused why we have this wiki page then. :)
> Im too busy (until mid-may) to comment on the spec in much detail
> perhaps we can arrange an online discussion mid may to flesh this all
> I have a few concerns with the nature of the proposed desktop file spec.
> I agree its important the desktop file should be easily convertible to
> rdf but we do want to eliminate the complexity (and extra overhead of
> rdf) as much as possible from it - that is the point of having the
> desktop file.
I think still this compexity issue is not an issue at all. The reason I think
1) most of metametadata definitions will be provided by Xesam
2) code to parse this in the database will be written only once
3) If a dev needs an exotic field, somebody can help. It's not much of work.
So what is more important is flexibility, extensibility and compatibility.
Also, it is important to act fast, otherwise the goal of compatibility is
unattainable since much of the code gets written around metadata spec.
Analyzers are written to extract data and feed in to the indexer in a specific
format. It becomes a real problem if our projects do this in a different way.
More information about the xdg