Hans Reiser wrote:

John D. Heintz wrote:


Does some sort of syntactic shorthand actually break the set theoretic naming system rules? Or is this just something you view as needless complexity?


precisely what syntactic shorthand?



foo/nsa:permissions -> foo/nsa.gov/secure-linux/permissions


This assumes a mapping from "nsa" -> "nsa.gov/security/".

The characters up to the ':' would be looked up in a namespaces map, and if found the substituion would occur before further name-> object resolution. I don't think this breaks the goals set out in the "Future Vision" white paper, but I guess that is exactly what I am asking you ;-)

John

Reply via email to