Re: Gathering package upstream meta-data in the UDD. (was: Re: more formally indicating the registration URL)
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:59:31AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Since most of the information apart from the bibliographic references is
> currently sparse, I propose to only import the bibliographic material for the
> If it fits wells the blends script that creates the web sentinels,
> perhaps the ???long??? format (package name / keyword / value) will help us to keep
> the system most simple. Also, that is the closest to an RDF tuple???
I don't think that it is a good idea to aggregate all the bibliographic
information into a text field. This makes no sense if you want to
attract a more general usage. IMHO we should go with
at least. We should decide whether to allow more than one bibliographic
information dataset per package (and how to distinguish these).