URL Syntax was: URI Syntax

[Nick Chalko <ni...@chalko.com>]

Adam R. B. Jack wrote:

>Folks wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>So here is a key focuossed issue.
>>>What should the URI look like
>>>
>>>The latest URI discussed was
>>>
>>>http://<host>/<project>/<version>/artifact-[<version>].ext
>>>
>>>For example
>>>* http://repo.apache.org/org-apache-ant/1.5.1/ant-1.5.1.jar
>>>      
>>>
>
>Are we discussing URI or URL? If URI, ok good .. but is this current?
>  
>
URL really. 
And it was the latest out of the Wiki


>  
>
>>>The part  still needs to be decided is the project name.
>>>      
>>>
>>Since this is an ASF repo, isn't the ASF project name enough?
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I think the most stable idea proposed is the java package name with -
>>>instead of .
>>>      
>>>
>>I'd prefer to stick with the ASF project name.
>>    
>>
>
>I can agree, it is a lot less 'fat' than package, but does it help the user
>enough? Say the user downloads a new project from CVS into their IDE, gets
>started, and finds that package org.apache.xyz is missing. How do they know
>that xyz is part of apache project jakarta-blah or whatever? Maybe a nice
>reverse map (kinda like Gump gives) would help. I feel that project name
>tends to push strongly towards client side metadata though, [or server side
>queries, I guess.]
>  
>
BTW: Clearly package is Java-centric. Maybe something namespaced? E.g

>java:org.apache.ant or something. I'm just throwing this out, I suspect
>project name is right, I just believe it has issues.
>  
>
Rember package is just a reverse top level domain.  This is a way to 
ensure that a name is globably unique.

More in a seperate email.

>regards
>
>Adam
>  
>