On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 14:15:46 +0200, Sebastian Trüg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Recently the issue of nfo:Bookmark vs. nfo:Website came up. I voted for > using nfo:Website only but then realized that I always had > misinterpreted its comment: > It states that nfo:Website is a container for remote resources such as > nfo:RemoteDataObject. And those remote resources are interpreted as > nfo:HtmlDocuments. > > Thus, we (I) always used nfo:Website wrong. > > Now the question is: should we correct our (my) usage and hope that > others will not step into the trap of thinking that a Website = Webpage? > Or should we change nfo:Website to be what we (well, me at least) always > thought it was: a web page/web address? > > In other words: should we improve the comment on nfo:Website to explain > that it is in fact not a single web page but a collection of pages > typically accessible through one domain? > Or should we change it to be a nie:DataObject which represents a single > web page? > Or should we (in addition to the first maybe) introduce another class > nfo:Webpage which is a nie:DataObject and can be part of a nfo:Website? Not sure if I got this right now. According to the docs an nmo:Website is kind of the collection of htmldocuments the website is consisting of, which makes sense IMO. I don't see a use in nfo:Webpage for a single htmldocument since there already is nfo:htmldocument, so it would be redundant. Especially in a time where a webpage is not necessarily linked to it's own htmldocument anymore (javascript and co). So I would suggest to correct the usage that an nfo:Website can be a collection of htmlDocuments and not just a single htmldocument. Cheers, Christian > > Cheers, > Sebastian > _______________________________________________ > Nepomuk mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomu _______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
