Apologies for not understanding procedure. How do I make progress with this?
My position: 1) I still think Net::OAI::ORE is as good as anything 2) If Net::OAI::ORE is not allowed then SemanticWeb::OAI::ORE would be OK What do I need to do? Cheers, Simeon On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 08:48:49PM -0400, Simeon Warner wrote: > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 07:19:44PM -0500, brian d foy wrote: > > [[ This message was both posted and mailed: see > > the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]] > > > > In article <201011031557.oa3fvh10032...@pause.fiz-chemie.de>, Perl > > Authors Upload Server <upl...@pause.perl.org> wrote: > > > > > The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List: > > > > > > modid: Net::OAI::ORE > > > DSLIP: RdpOp > > > description: Implement OAI-ORE specification > > > userid: SIMEON (Simeon Warner) > > > > > (http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/toc). Choice of "bad" Net:: > > > namespace motivated by parallel with earlier OAI-PMH harvesting > > > specification and Net::OAI::Harvester module that implements that > > > (by other authors). > > > > Sometimes you have to break with the past. Net's the wrong place, but > > WWW might be dumping it into obscurity of initializations. > > > > Would SemanticWeb::OAI::ORE better describe and categorize it? > > Perhaps although potential users might not think of it that way (and > even the RDF modules I use aren't in that namespace). I would prefer > to stick with the bad use of Net. > > Cheers, > Simeon
