Re: [devel-ref] author/homepage in description
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 10:57:48PM +0100, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> I did not mean an URI _into_ a field (like URIs into Description), but a
> general field which would only contain a URI. URIs are not descriptive for the
> binary package management, so it's my _opinion_ (!standards) that there should
> not be one specific field into the package control file.
> Of course, i would not remove the extended description.
>
> If we want to include homepage or snapshot into the package control files, we
> may use `home made' protocols in Description: field like:
>
> <homepage://some.site.org/some/index.html>
> <snapshot://some.site.org/some/snapshot.png>
Certainly both of these are useless, as they fail to define a protocol
in any meaningful way. (http: and ftp: are both valid and different for
those examples.) Even if they were defined they would almost certainly
just be aliases for other protocols, and thus would be misuses of the
scheme part of URIs.
URI schemes are not to be used as a means of expressing the purpose of
the URI.
> <bugs://some.site.org/some/bug/report/system/>
That might be useful, but only if a bug-reporting URI scheme were
defined and distinct from existing schemes.
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: