On 5/2/13 6:24 AM, "Chip Childers" <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:

>On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 12:40:45PM +0530, Abhinandan Prateek wrote:
>> 
>> The tags are name-value pairs basically meant to label resources by a
>>user.
>> The purpose of the current API is to add useful meta information to
>> resources so that they can be meaningfully controlled by external tools.
>> 
>> The current implementation of meta info API may look similar to tags
>>with
>> possible edition of a "system" or a "user" qualifier/flag in order to
>> control visibility.
>> 
>> But it is not so. Tags by definition are name value pairs where both
>>name
>> and value is a string. If we try to set the meta data information in the
>> tags we are severely restricting the type of meta information that can
>>be
>> contained in the tags. For example if the "data-type" information is
>> required in this meta-data we will end up tweaking the tag system to
>>serve
>> some purpose that it is not meant for.
>> 
>> I strongly suggest that we do not try to contain the meta information
>>in a
>> restricted framework provided by tags.
>> 
>> -abhi
>
>I don't understand this argument.  Most primary data types have string
>representations, right?  (ref: JSON)
>
>Are you talking about complex types?  Or things like integers, long,
>datetime, etc...?

I didn't understand it either.
Perhaps the issue is whether this meta-data is available to the end-user
or not? At least, tags are visible to the end-user. Is it the intention
that this 3rd party service do its magic in cahoots with the admin?

Reply via email to