On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 02:25:56PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 11:22:36PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> > > Hmmm, Gnutella doesn't have URIs AFAIK?
> > It should anyways.
>
> How can you have a "Universal Resource Indicator" when you can't locate
> resources globally?
What would be nice would be if we could get all systems that have a layer
that translates keyword/logical searches into definite addresses have a
shared interface for making queries and returning a list (in XML I guess)
of URIs. This is the first time that I have seen a compelling need for
interoperability in this field actually.
> > > Certainly separate layers, I have no problem with that - but I see
> > > little point in making them separate applications.
> > What is a separate application? That is a distribution issue. What is
> > important is that they are separate problems.
>
> Ok, I guess it is down to whether they share code, whether they run in
> the same runtime environment, and whether they are ever distributed
> separately.
The first isn't really true in java, and the second and third are much the
same really.
> > > > Either way, I have been
> > > > thinking for a while that we should at least experiment about this by
> > > > making it a seperate application for Napster/Gnutella type filesharing.
> > > Can you define what you mean by this?
> > An application that works like Napster.
>
> So a URI is actually a URL, and it just lets you find URLs? Not sure
> that there would be much point...
IIRC URI is just a more general term for the same thing as URL.
< >
> > I feel a little bit of "feature creep" over that. IMHO We don't have
> > searching with binary key closeness down well enough to go running off on
> > tangents like this quite yet. If you do want to code it, I hope that you
> > take my advice and keep it separate from the main code for now (obviously
> > sharing classes is good).
>
> Hey, "feature creep" are our middle names ;) It has been the intention
> to implement searching for years (wow - I can say things like "for
> years" in regard to Freenet development, that is scary), this isn't just
> me suddently coming up with a new idea.
>
> I have every intention of keeping it separate, although I definitely
> still think that it belongs as part of Freenet (we could do a poll -
> "Should freenet have fuzzy searching?" but that probably wouldn't be
> fair).
I think I prefer feature creep to democracy...
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
