Sebastian, Overall I agree. I had this in my pipeline for quite some time but at a lower priority, but since you want to discuss it now, I've filed a detailed ticket with motivation and explanations and we should discuss it here: https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/oscaf/ticket/45
В сообщении от Четверг 27 августа 2009 23:08:30 автор Sebastian Trüg написал: > My dear Nepomuk followers, > > maybe you have heard of PIMO[1] and how it is (or should be) used in > KDE[2]. > > The idea is to not annotate the resource itself but a related pimo:Thing. > This makes perfect sense for resources like contacts, addressbook entries > and IM accounts which can be merged under one pimo:Person representing the > real world person. > > However in the case of plain files I am not sure if we gain that much. On > the other hand all queries become much more complicated and maintaining the > file annotation altogether, too. Not to mention the problem of telling > people that they should not annotate their files directly. > > That is why I have a patch in the pipeline which makes > Nepomuk::Resource::pimoThing()[3] return the resource itself for files. > This means that file resources and their pimo things have the same URI, > essentially merging them. > > I would like to have some opinions on the topic, both pro and contra. In > the latter case please provide examples of where the distinction between > pimo thing and file comes in handy. > > Thanks a lot, > Sebastian _______________________________________________ nepomuk-kde mailing list nepomuk-kde@semanticdesktop.org http://lists.semanticdesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk-kde
