Closed bergos closed 8 years ago
A bit a suggestive title, what package name do you suggest for my foobar utils? ;)
@retog @nicola I would like to move the ParserUtil and SerializerUtil class to the rdf-ext package. How would you name it? Just plural Parsers and Serializers? Should the class name contain media type? Any suggestions?
I think I want a package for like this one. I would prefer to not require two packages
@nicola We should keep this one. Maybe we rename it to rdf-common-formats or something like that in version 1.x. I just like to move the classes which manage the parsers and serialiers to the core lib. You still need to register the parsers and serialiers and the mime-type-utils package will still provide the same features. But that would allow to use the mime type handling with a reduce set of parsers and serialiers.
"Parsers and Serializers" if fine for me. As for the package that depends on all "known" parsers and serialize I think rdf-common-formats
is good.
rdf-formats
:+1:
It's just common formats, rdf-formats
seems misleading to me as it might be interpreted as to bee supporting all concrete syntaxes or worse to be required for using any concrete syntax.
I renamed the package to rdf-formats-common
. I think that pattern is nicer, because we could have packages like rdf-formats-html
in the future.
Great Name! (I was afraid you would name it after a space fog :) )
@retog
{
"name": "rdf-blue-marble",
"description": "RDF formats of planet earth"
}
:smile:
But @nicola brought up a good point. I expect there will be a rc5...
+1 :)
The mime type utils are only usefull when many parsers and serializers are registered. To remove the dependencies from the rdf-ext package, the code should get it's own package. Any proposals for a package name?