[vos-d] vobject namespace

[Reed Hedges]

Peter Amstutz wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 07:23:05AM -0500, Reed Hedges wrote:
>> How is this different than the way things currently are?
> 
> It's not, except that s5 uses 32 bit identifiers as the "canonical name" 
> of a vobject rather than arbitrary strings.
> 
>> Are you proposing to require that all objects except one special root 
>> have at least one parent?  Or just to encourage that practice for most 
>> objects?
> 
> Requiring it.  This allows us to have one unified namespace instead of 
> lots of little subtrees hanging off the site root.  

OK, so / is the root object, not the site, (and if you ask it to 
list-children you only get objects in the root, not all) and /foo is an 
objet that's properly in the root, but  /$abcde is bypassing the 
"filesystem" and accessing directly by ID?

No way to get *all* objects on a site? (Might be useful, not for remote 
access but when working with COD files, say)


Also I think this
> makes it easier to ultimately start defining recommendations for 
> organization (i.e. where does vobject reflection go, configuration, 
> worlds, hypervos pages, etc...  it may well end up looking like a unix 
> filesystem!)

Right, well we already do this sometimes, it's just all ad hoc. Actually 
I like the ad-doc nature, one nice thing about VOS is that it's not 
neccesary to have a conforming structure, so long as you have the right 
references to the right vobjects with the right types in the right places.

 > Obviously this is
> partially a programming problem that they weren't freed properly, but it 
> would be a great advantage to be able to automatically sweep up these 
> loose vobjects.

Do you think that this problem is actually a feature? If you want to 
move objects out of the normal tree but still keep them around.  I.e. if 
it garbage collected you'de have to move the objects to /tmp etc.

Reed