On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 02:25:56PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 11:22:36PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > > Hmmm, Gnutella doesn't have URIs AFAIK? > > It should anyways. > > How can you have a "Universal Resource Indicator" when you can't locate > resources globally?
What would be nice would be if we could get all systems that have a layer that translates keyword/logical searches into definite addresses have a shared interface for making queries and returning a list (in XML I guess) of URIs. This is the first time that I have seen a compelling need for interoperability in this field actually. > > > Certainly separate layers, I have no problem with that - but I see > > > little point in making them separate applications. > > What is a separate application? That is a distribution issue. What is > > important is that they are separate problems. > > Ok, I guess it is down to whether they share code, whether they run in > the same runtime environment, and whether they are ever distributed > separately. The first isn't really true in java, and the second and third are much the same really. > > > > Either way, I have been > > > > thinking for a while that we should at least experiment about this by > > > > making it a seperate application for Napster/Gnutella type filesharing. > > > Can you define what you mean by this? > > An application that works like Napster. > > So a URI is actually a URL, and it just lets you find URLs? Not sure > that there would be much point... IIRC URI is just a more general term for the same thing as URL. < > > > I feel a little bit of "feature creep" over that. IMHO We don't have > > searching with binary key closeness down well enough to go running off on > > tangents like this quite yet. If you do want to code it, I hope that you > > take my advice and keep it separate from the main code for now (obviously > > sharing classes is good). > > Hey, "feature creep" are our middle names ;) It has been the intention > to implement searching for years (wow - I can say things like "for > years" in regard to Freenet development, that is scary), this isn't just > me suddently coming up with a new idea. > > I have every intention of keeping it separate, although I definitely > still think that it belongs as part of Freenet (we could do a poll - > "Should freenet have fuzzy searching?" but that probably wouldn't be > fair). I think I prefer feature creep to democracy... -- 'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?' 'Here,' Montag touched his head. 'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded. Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
