[Xesam] Desktop Search Hackfest Writeup
Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
mikkel.kamstrup at gmail.com
Wed Sep 24 22:34:49 PDT 2008
2008/9/24 Antoni Mylka <antoni.mylka at gmail.com>:
> 2008/9/24 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen <mikkel.kamstrup at gmail.com>:
>> Hi all,
>> Since the hackfest had a pretty massive impact on the Xesam future I
>> have started documenting our discussions so we have some written
>> material to move forward on.
>> The beginnings can be found here: http://xesam.org/main/Hackfest2008
>> Sadly it is far from done, but I will continue to work on it over the
>> next days, and you may consider this an invitation to help because I
>> really don't have much time for it. In fact I would hugely appreciate
>> it if everyone would write a little snippet in their particular areas
>> of interest.
>> I will ping you guys when it is more complete.
>> Urho: Did you have some notes from the meetings somewhere?
> First impression. The "Ontology" page says that "Nepomuk primarily
> misses a File ontology". Could you elaborate a bit more on that.
> There is the NFO - Nepomuk File Ontology.
> what's wrong with it?
Nothing :-) That statement was simply one i heard at the hackfest and
I am just trying to get information out of my head for now. I'll
update the page with a notification about this.
I don't know if there was another reason it was put like this. I don't
recall who said it... Maybe someone can elaborate?
Speaking of the Nepomuk ontologies. It says on the page "Minor changes
may be implemented in future revisions", for Xesam we really have to
do better than that. Is there any promise of backwards compatibility
(and compat in what sense)? Of course we could always freeze Xesam at
a certain revision (if we decide to use it), but I am really not too
keen on that.
More information about the Xesam