Hi all, One thing that slightly worries me about the camlistore schema is that generic objects (like an image or a video or my tax return) are very tightly bound to the file representation they had when I stuffed them into Camlistore. Now, this is all well-and-good for if you wanted to store a database or something which is very clearly a file and nothing more. But for me, images and videos are clearly quite different from just "a file". Sure, you can store them as files but they should be considered an object of their own.
All of this droning on brings me to my point, I propose that we add another layer of indirection to the camlistore file schema. So rather than a file directly pointing at the contents like this: [permanode ->] file -> parts (contents) We would do something like this: [permanode ->] file -> object -> parts (contents) I couldn't think of a better name than "object" (I was going to call it "type" but that's even worse). The point of all of this being that you can now tag an image as an abstract object without having to tag the file description of that image. IMO the cool thing about this is that then you could create higher level objects in camlistore that reference an image without necessarily referencing a particular file that the image existed as at one point. Personally, I think this is a much more aesthetic way of abstracting a file representation of an object from the object itself. But maybe I'm just a purist. ;) Now, this obviously breaks the schema. But we could make the old way of doing it (file -> parts) as a legacy mode that implies an intermediate object of type "raw" (or something like that, where there's no object data attached to the contents of the file). What do you all think? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Camlistore" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
