Peter Amstutz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 07:23:05AM -0500, Reed Hedges wrote: >> How is this different than the way things currently are? > > It's not, except that s5 uses 32 bit identifiers as the "canonical name" > of a vobject rather than arbitrary strings. > >> Are you proposing to require that all objects except one special root >> have at least one parent? Or just to encourage that practice for most >> objects? > > Requiring it. This allows us to have one unified namespace instead of > lots of little subtrees hanging off the site root.
OK, so / is the root object, not the site, (and if you ask it to list-children you only get objects in the root, not all) and /foo is an objet that's properly in the root, but /$abcde is bypassing the "filesystem" and accessing directly by ID? No way to get *all* objects on a site? (Might be useful, not for remote access but when working with COD files, say) Also I think this > makes it easier to ultimately start defining recommendations for > organization (i.e. where does vobject reflection go, configuration, > worlds, hypervos pages, etc... it may well end up looking like a unix > filesystem!) Right, well we already do this sometimes, it's just all ad hoc. Actually I like the ad-doc nature, one nice thing about VOS is that it's not neccesary to have a conforming structure, so long as you have the right references to the right vobjects with the right types in the right places. > Obviously this is > partially a programming problem that they weren't freed properly, but it > would be a great advantage to be able to automatically sweep up these > loose vobjects. Do you think that this problem is actually a feature? If you want to move objects out of the normal tree but still keep them around. I.e. if it garbage collected you'de have to move the objects to /tmp etc. Reed _______________________________________________ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
