Am moving the discussion to ohs-dev, as hitting
[reply] is almost automatic, and it defeats me
on the other list.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: terminology for purple numbers]
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 14:07:26 -0700
From: Eric Armstrong <email@example.com>
To: Eugene Eric Kim <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Eugene Eric Kim wrote:
> > What about 'hid' -- hierarchical ID -- which is what Purple uses? I was
> > backing away from it before, but the discussion made me want to return to
> > it again. That's what those addresses do, after all -- express hierarchy.
> Okay, Murray and I chatted after yesterday's meeting, and agreed on the
> following convention:
> "nid" for node IDs
> "hid" for hierarchical IDs
Drat. I was on the verge of coming out in favor of pid.
Of all the options, path id made the most sense, if id
is going to be used at all.
Ontologically, speaking, though, I don't like the use
of "id" because "id" suggests a 1:1 mapping. There are
many paths to a single node, however. That many:1 mapping
is inconsistent with the XML notion of "id" as a unique
Personally, I'd go with "nid" and "path".
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 17:58:07 PDT