On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 10:07 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> >> I'm interested in contemplating RDF as a full catalog solution for
> >> Zope, at least as a thought experiment.
Great!
> > Note that the use of bound variables also removes the need for brains.
>
> We actually don't have catalog brain
On Aug 30, 2005, at 11:46 AM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 23:24 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
Right. Well in this case we would provide just a very simple
interface
facade that had no effect when run in an environment with no
zope.interface (ie, catch the ImportError, null-out
On Aug 29, 2005, at 11:24 PM, Gary Poster wrote:
On Aug 26, 2005, at 3:03 AM, Daniel Krech wrote:
On Aug 25, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:32 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
see what he thinks. I wonder how "lite" the component kernel
can go.
The only
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 23:24 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> >> Right. Well in this case we would provide just a very simple
> >> interface
> >> facade that had no effect when run in an environment with no
> >> zope.interface (ie, catch the ImportError, null-out the facade) or
> >> hook
> >> into
On Aug 26, 2005, at 3:03 AM, Daniel Krech wrote:
On Aug 25, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:32 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
see what he thinks. I wonder how "lite" the component kernel
can go.
The only thing I have in mind is the interface package, which is
On Aug 26, 2005, at 2:56 AM, Daniel Krech wrote:
On Aug 25, 2005, at 2:32 PM, Gary Poster wrote:
On Aug 24, 2005, at 9:13 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 12:39 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
...
Since Dan is already using Twisted in his app server, maybe he'd be
willing to let R
On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 14:32 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> > see what he thinks. I wonder how "lite" the component kernel can go.
>
> The only thing I have in mind is the interface package, which is what
> Twisted uses. That's all we would need. zope.component needs
> zope.interface, zope.tes
On Aug 24, 2005, at 9:13 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 12:39 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
...
Since Dan is already using Twisted in his app server, maybe he'd be
willing to let RDFLib drink the Zope interface Kool-Aid along with us
and Twisted.
I know he's looked at it, an
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 12:39 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> The Zope 3 back end for RDFLib allows you to use any intid-registered
> object as a resource, as long as they are adaptable to
> rdflib.interfaces.IURIRef. The Zope 3 back end package provides a
> simple adapter for all Zope content ob
On Aug 23, 2005, at 8:07 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote:
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 18:04 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
The relationship between ZODB content objects, their int id as
provided by the pertinent intid utility, and a (theoretical)
corresponding RDF URI is what I'm having a hard time not maki
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 18:04 -0400, Gary Poster wrote:
> The relationship between ZODB content objects, their int id as
> provided by the pertinent intid utility, and a (theoretical)
> corresponding RDF URI is what I'm having a hard time not making hacky
> in my mind. I'll think about it som
On Aug 23, 2005, at 5:06 PM, Michel Pelletier wrote
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 16:26 -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
They are know, but they are an *infeasible* join key (not only are
they
strings, but as arbitrary-length strings with common prefixes, their
sorting semantics are almost worst-case for ma
12 matches
Mail list logo
