On Monday 18 February 2002 11:38, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> . . .
> I'd like to see Xindice mature as a DBMS before adding
> features that are specific to a certain usage model
> especially since we are not sure would be the primary
> usage model for Xindice.
>. . .
I understand your point - that's why I tried to suggest a more general
concept ("data/resource forks") instead of "just" metadata.
IMHO metadata *is* a fork or alternate view on the data that is stored.
My point is that if the designers decide on implementing such a
fork it might not be more complicated to implement a general fork
mechanism.
But of course either one of them (metadata or forks) could be an
additional layer on top of XIndice. Not being an active developer here
I cannot decide which way is best, it's just that as a user I'd find
the metadata/fork concept very useful.
--
-- Bertrand Delacr�taz, www.codeconsult.ch
-- web technologies consultant - OO, Java, XML, C++
