Anthony Bryan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Hampus Wessman<[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Change 1: Remove unnecessary tags that carry no information >> >> The metalink format contains some tags that could be removed without >> losing ANY functionality. I'm thinking about <files>, <verification> and >> <resources>. They may look pretty to humans, but I think the format >> would be easier to deal with if they were removed. A metalink contains >> one or more files, which contains hashes and urls (among other things). >> The following xml structure reflects this hierarchy just as well as the >> current one: >> >> <metalink> >> <file name="example.ext"> >> <identity>Example</identity> >> <hash type="md5">2156346474343745</hash> >> <url>http://example.com/</url> >> <url>ftp://ftp.example.com/</url> >> </file> >> <file name="example2.ext"> >> ... >> </file> >> </metalink> >> >> (I skipped some details here, like <?xml ...) >> >> In my experience it would be easier to parse/load/read a metalink with >> that structure. It may depend on how you do that, but I can't think of >> any situation when it would make it harder. >> > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bryan-metalink-13#section-4.1 > > happy, Hampus? :) > Very happy =) I think it looks great!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
