[r6rs-discuss] Rationale issues

From: Mikael Tillenius <mti>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 08:11:17 +0200

John Cowan escribi?:
> Things aren't as bad as you make them out to be. The scheme specifies
> how the authority is to be interpreted, and the system named by the
> host part of the authority decides how to interpret the path (which
> contains a hierarchical key) and the query (which contains zero or more
> non-hierarchical keys, often but not always name-value pairs).

Yes, I agree. URIs certainly work very well and could be used for
library names in Scheme. My main point was just that they don't actually
solve any problems that cannot be solved (in essentailly the very same
way) by som other syntax, such as s-exps.

You either risk name collisions _or_ need a central authority. In
practice I don't think name collisions would be a big problem and over
time conventions could be established (e.g. start with your
organizations name).

/Mikael
Received on Fri Jun 29 2007 - 02:11:17 UTC