[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [SUMMARY] issues under contention in debian metadata

Marco.Budde@hqsys.antar.com (Marco Budde) writes:
> APH>   Marco's:           docreg file path + Identifier *or* URL
> I#ve changed my proposal. I suggest that we use
>   <package><name choosen by the maintainer>
> as identifier and the we add a new field called "File: ". I don#t like the  
> idea to use URLs or filenames as identifier.
> Adding this new field wouldn#t violate the DC "standard".
> I think the reason that there#s no such field in the DC "standard" is very  
> clear. They use it for HTML files (DC will be in the HTML file) and for  
> books (they can use the ISBN number).

Ah, now, see, this is excellent.  It sounds like maybe you read some
of the URN standards!  Each package has its own namespace, and if they
want to, the package maintainer can register from one to many URLs for
the retrieval of the file, which the local URN2URL resolver (probably
CGI) can use to redirect a user to where the document is.

You're right that this is a true URN scheme, and that it doesn't have
*any* coupling with the locations of files/paths.  

I think we should offer both a 'file:' scheme and a 'urn:debiandoc:'
scheme.  Maintainers who care can register URNs and maintain this
registration.  Now the registration scheme and the resolver scheme
would have to be worked out.  I think we'd need a local resovler and a
central resolver.  Furthermore, I don't think URN2URL information
should necessarily be transmitted to the local resolver by way of the
docreg file. However, you're right, we could do it that way.  It would
take some more thought...

Anyhow, I *do* want to get a first round out, stripping out the
advanced features so I can start to get implementing it and pkg
maintainers using it.  The real-world experience will be invaluable.

> APH>      con - dislike the coupling between docreg file path and
> APH>            Identifier, suspect this will lead to orphaned objects in
> APH>            conjunction with FHS and problems with debugging, and
> APH>            widespread maintainer confusion.
> As I#ve shown you have got these problems with both solutions.

Indeed.  But I still think we do need an implicit, easy to use
relative URL scheme.  Both you and I have workable schemes for this.

> APH>   APH's URN: Identifier is URL, or a URN of the form
> APH>              'debian://package/<file relative to pkg doc area>'.
> APH>      pro - FSSTD to FHS transition doesn't not require docreg change
> But it will slow down the building of an index, because you have to search  
> several directories.

Yes, that's a problem.

.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: