Re: Structured storage? (was Re: dbus and GNOME 2.8)

["Manuel Amador (Rudd-O)" <amadorm usm edu ec>]

Actually, the widespread use of protocols that permit metadata exchange
over TCP/IP may counter your argument.

Fact is, metadata needs to be stored.  Not necessarily in a very
structured way, but some sort of infrastructure needs to be provided at
some level, and GNOME should take advantage of it, once it's deployed. 
Check out the Extended Attributes project for Linux.

El lun, 05-04-2004 a las 21:13, Maciej Stachowiak escribió:
> On 05Apr2004 07:24PM (-0400), Robert Love wrote:
> >
> > What the goal of Storage, WinFS, etc. is is to decouple the data from
> > the structure of the file.  Right now, complex data formats essentially
> > recreate file system structure inside of each file.  The filesystem
> > should be the ultimate storage medium.  To realize this, and have
> > everything-as-a-file and one-thing-per-file, we need a much smarter
> > filesystem.  WinFS can natively understand complex concepts such as
> > "address book entries" in a very simple and clean way, because the file
> > system itself implements structure and typing.
> 
> Historically, operating systems that provided more structured
> filesystems lost out to simple byte-oriented approaches. In a large
> part I think this is due to the increasing popularity of networking
> and the resultant fact that, ultimately, you will have to interchange
> octet streams. Thus, ultimately you must standardize what the raw data
> looks like, and be able to get at the raw data.
> 
> I do not see how the new trend towards structured storage avoids this
> failure, especially since every operating environment seems on track
> to grow it's own incompatible approach.
> 
> Regards,
> Myaciej
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list