Xesam meta-meta-data spec needs attention.

[Evgeny Egorochkin]

On Tuesday 01 May 2007 21:47:42 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> 2007/5/1, Evgeny Egorochkin <phreedom.stdin at gmail.com>:
> > On Tuesday 01 May 2007 17:55:26 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> > > > > $MIN_CARDINALITY
> > > > >
> > > > > >   Minimum cardinality. Minimum number of properties of this type
> >
> > you
> >
> > > > must
> > > >
> > > > > > set
> > > > > > for a given file.
> > > > > >   Lets specify mandatory properties. Default is 0.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there any example of a mandatory property? Does it even make
> >
> > sense?
> >
> > > > File name or URI?
> > >
> > > I don't see why they have to be mandatory. Not everything comes from a
> > > file.
> > >
> > > In the search API it is specifically avoided to use global identifiers
> >
> > for
> >
> > > objects - as fx a mandatory uri would be. My opinion is that we
> >
> > shouldn't
> >
> > > *force* URIs or any mandatory property onto any object.
> >
> > The intent of this was to make life easier for apps by guaranteeing
> > existence
> > of some basic properties, however I do agree that the list would be
> > extremely
> > short if not non-existent.
>
> Also taking URI as an example, you would need to enforce that it actually
> contains a valid uri or else it would be useless anyway. We could add
> another type called "uri" which guarantees that the values form a valid
> uri. I don't think we should guarantee that any fields are indeed set
> though.

At this moment it makes sense to drop minCardinality. It can be added later if 
needed. Another issue worth considering in the perspective is units.

IMHO We should finalize the first edition of the standard and extend it if the 
need arises.

I find it strange that nobody else comments on this. Perhaps everybody 
agree :)

Greetings,
Evgeny