On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Abdulaziz Ghuloum<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jun 19, 2009, at 10:06 PM, Grant Rettke wrote: >> If manifests are simply for communicating version and author and other >> information, DESCOT might work as well as anything else. I will ask >> Aaron. > > As I said, I think all of this information (and more) can be pumped to > Descot (once Descot has something tangible to show). Do you see any > conflicts or duplication of effort?
It seems like duplication of effort if DESCOT already has the manifest problem solved. I think that one of the things that DESCOT does is to provide what you are describing as a manifest: its name, who wrote it, and whatever else you care about using an s-expr format to specify RDF triples (I read that). The other part of the DESCOT would then be the server that actually indexes and mirrors all of this stuff. You only care about the first part right now. I asked Aaron about it. He would know for sure.
