[Xesam] Nepomuk/Xesam future (was Re: condition of 1.0 ?)

[Evgeny Egorochkin]

On 24 апреля 2009 18:22:08 Jamie McCracken wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 14:19 +0200, Roberto Guido wrote:
> > On Friday 24 April 2009 10:54:24 you wrote:
> > > I am working on tracker, and
> > > we are using nepomuk.
> >
> > I cannot understand how a project listed in the Freedesktop directory may
> > not only support a de-facto imposed specification but also drop support
> > for the language (Xesam) expressely aiming at interoperability and easy
> > of use. Probably (surely) Xesam 1.0 ontology is actually more steps back
> > the Nepomuk one, but also (as you suggested) has his own pros, such as a
> > more confortable query mechanism: I'm looking for a re-introduction of
> > the Xesam support in Tracker, ASAP.
>
> unfortunately nokia are funding development of tracker

Yeah,  it's really unfortunate ;)

> and have
> preferred to make use of the more powerful nepomuk framework
>
> its unlikely that xesam support will be added to tracker now (though a
> future xesam 2 than encompasses nepomuk might)

I don't think that Nokia's involvement caused any decrease in available coder 
man hours for Tracker, and as such implementing Xesam 1.0 is not any harder 
than it was before Nokia. The question is should every implementation do Xesam 
1.0 themselves or maybe eg implement Xesam 1.0 over 2.0 in client libs.

> also with kde (strigi + nepomuk) and gnome (tracker + nepomuk)
> standardising on nepomuk, xesam is by and large redundant

Not at all. We still need to define common APIs. We still want to influence 
the direction Nepomuk takes. There's enough freedesktop-specific stuff to 
warrant a dedicated discussion space.

> I dont know the state of beagle or their plans so I cant comment on what
> they are doing
>
> Sadly the other indexers are not really relevant to the major desktops
> at this time so xesam does not look a viable standard at the moment