On Fri, 28 Jan 2000, Simon Cox wrote:
> So from here I see just a few alternatives:
> (a) consider the Agent-type to be part of the agent-identifier,
> according to some not-necessarily-pretty scheme;
> (b) have a clean model in mind in the background,
> and a clear way to map the dirty metadata into it;
> (c) paint ourselves whiter-than-white,
> but get left behind by all the implementors.
>
> IMHO a combination of (a) and (b) is both pragmatic and also
> does not do any real violence to the clean model.
I think we are pretty-much in agreement.
However, my real point was... are we ready to vote on this at this stage?
I think not. I thought we were going to be conservative in what we
recommend. Agent-type doesn't feel very conservative to me.
Andy
--
Distributed Systems and Services
UK Office for Library and Information Networking
University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK Voice: +44 1225 323933
www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell Fax: +44 1225 826838
Resource Discovery Network - www.rdn.ac.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|