2007/5/1, Evgeny Egorochkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

On Tuesday 01 May 2007 17:55:26 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> > > $MIN_CARDINALITY
> > >
> > > >   Minimum cardinality. Minimum number of properties of this type
you
> >
> > must
> >
> > > > set
> > > > for a given file.
> > > >   Lets specify mandatory properties. Default is 0.
> > >
> > > Is there any example of a mandatory property? Does it even make
sense?
> >
> > File name or URI?
>
> I don't see why they have to be mandatory. Not everything comes from a
> file.
>
> In the search API it is specifically avoided to use global identifiers
for
> objects - as fx a mandatory uri would be. My opinion is that we
shouldn't
> *force* URIs or any mandatory property onto any object.

The intent of this was to make life easier for apps by guaranteeing
existence
of some basic properties, however I do agree that the list would be
extremely
short if not non-existent.


Also taking URI as an example, you would need to enforce that it actually
contains a valid uri or else it would be useless anyway. We could add
another type called "uri" which guarantees that the values form a valid uri.
I don't think we should guarantee that any fields are indeed set though.

Is it always possible to derive this from
>
> > field type or not?
>
> I don't think you can derive it always. Think of some app that stores
some
> unique string ID along side all objects. It might want to be able to
search
> for these IDs, but it surely don't want them tokenized just because they
> might contain a space. In this case the app would want to use
> INDEXING=atomic.

Reasonable. I proprose to make atomic the default.


That is probably the right thing to avoid some really wierd results by
unaware programmers.

Cheers,
Mikkel
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg

Reply via email to