[Rpm-metadata] take 3 (or is it 4) whatever :)

seth vidal skvidal at phy.duke.edu
Wed Oct 15 05:04:47 UTC 2003

>   No ! Do not mess with the namespace, and make it dependant to 
> who have run the package. Your suggestion is NOT a appropriate 
> namespace use.

I think this is a confusion. My point was to make it easier for parsers
to see what is an rpm and what is a deb, so I could easily toss out the
debs or rpms depending on which I can deal with. Ideally so someone
could write a program to build this format for a repository containing

>  You must consider the semantic of the tags to be associated to the
> fully qualified information (namespace name + local tag name)
> i.e. the URI used for the namespace + the tag name
>  Waht you suggest implied that the tools would have to drop check
> for the namespace name and hence work on a non-compliant to the
> XML Namespace spec . Do NOT do that.
>  The namespace must be unique for the semantic of the tags we define
> For the tags where there is no agreement on semantic, then they are not
> part of the spec and should be implemented in different namespace.
>  Do not mess with namespace if you don't understand the model, read
> the spec if needed it's short !
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/

I read this - and all it defines is a nice way of isolating out the
stuff that is not in the global namespace.

as you mentioned on irc:

<common stuff>
  <special stuff>
  </special stuff>
</common stuff>

if we do that then it'd be handy to have a unique package-type
identifier somewhere in the <common> area so if the format is not one
you know about you can stop parsing.

so something like:
<metadata xmlns=commonnamespaceurl>
<package type="rpm">
  <common entries here/>
  <special xmlns=rpm-only-ns>
   <rpm-onlystuff here/>

sorry for the delay in getting back to everyone, been a bit busy.


More information about the Rpm-metadata mailing list