Thanks for the insight, Hervé. "packaging" is not part of coordinates: what you can have is "type"
I got "packaging" from: https://maven.apache.org/pom.html#Maven_Coordinates Is that page out of date? Or is "type" used in some circumstances / contexts, and "packaging" used in others? For the category terms, if resolving an artifact means both finding & downloading it, instead of just finding it, then I should change some of the category descriptions & names: have groupId, artifactId & version that identifies an artifact in a > specific repository This corresponds to the previously proposed "resolved". I'd rename it either resolvable, or available. have groupId, artifactId & version that does not identify any artifact in a > specific repository This corresponds to the previously proposed "unavailable-in-repository". I'd rename it either unresolvable, or unavailable. I think the names should be chosen as a consistent pair: either resolvable & unresolvable, or available & unavailable. have groupId & artifactId; might or might not have version Instead of making a special term for this category, it's probably better to just require that all coordinates have both groupId & artifactId, and to term any "coordinates" that don't have both as "incomplete coordinates".
