> From: Nick Chalko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > >Seems to me > >that there is limited utility to being able to parse the URI, > and that the > >real key is having meta-data with which to assemble it. But others don't > >seem to agree with that view. They want to parse semantic > information from > >the URI. > > > > The semantic information is there in the URL, org. project. version, > artifact type, name, release type etc. > People WILL try to parse it. I think it would be a Good Idea to make > it easy to parse at least the major pieces into discrete chunks. > > Assuming most people will simply replace "/" with "-" or "_" the issue > is not one off URL length or URL readability, it seems to be mostly > about the browseablity of of directories. > In other words have all the apache projects under the apache dir, or > under subdirs of apache. > > I think the convience of knowing exactly where org, project, and > version start and stop is worth the cost to browseablity. >
The proposals aim to structure the repository such that: 1. artifacts can easily be located by users 2. artifacts can easily be located by tools For [2], the intention is that a maven-like approach will be used for artifact resolution i.e, the user specifies enough criteria to enable a tool to unambigously locate an artifact. This approach doesn't require artifact URIs to be parsed. For advocates of URI parsing, what problems are you trying to solve? -Tim
