On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 08:44:00AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > Sorry, this is precisely rationale I fight against. Just saying "if you > don't know what this is, you don't need this" defeats the purpose of > packages descriptions.
In the general case maybe but for this I disagree. For highly specialised development tools such as RDF there is really no need to be verbose about what the name actually means because those who would be interested already know. I took a look at the current state of affairs w/r to RDF: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~ $ apt-cache search rdf | grep rdf liblrdf0 - a library to manipulate RDF files describing LADSPA plugins liblrdf0-dev - liblrdf0 development files librdf-perl - Perl language bindings for the Redland RDF library librdf-ruby - Ruby 1.8 language bindings for the Redland RDF library librdf0 - Redland Resource Description Framework (RDF) library librdf0-dev - Redland RDF library development libraries and headers php5-librdf - PHP5 language bindings for the Redland RDF library python-librdf - Python language bindings for the Redland RDF library python-rdflib - RDF library containing an RDF triple store and RDF/XML parser/serializer Only one of these packages is expanding the acronym RDF. I really don't see the use case here. -- Noah Slater <http://bytesexual.org/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
