On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 09:59:31AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Since most of the information apart from the bibliographic references is
> currently sparse, I propose to only import the bibliographic material for the
> moment.
Makes sense.
> If it fits wells the blends script that creates the web sentinels,
> perhaps the ???long??? format (package name / keyword / value) will help us
> to keep
> the system most simple. Also, that is the closest to an RDF tuple???
I don't think that it is a good idea to aggregate all the bibliographic
information into a text field. This makes no sense if you want to
attract a more general usage. IMHO we should go with
package text,
title text,
authors text
published-in text,
year int,
url text,
doi text
at least. We should decide whether to allow more than one bibliographic
information dataset per package (and how to distinguish these).
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qa-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
