Subject: Re: [boost] Metadata pull requests
From: Daniel James (dnljms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-08-18 11:52:01
On 18 August 2014 16:32, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I'm curious about this metadata idea.
> Maybe there has been a discussion about it and I didn't see it.
It's been discussed on several occasions, often in passing. When I
first started adding the metadata to libraries, I posted about it:
> But in any
> case I have a couple of questions:
> a) what is the immediate intended purpose and benefit?
The immediate benefit is that it lets people update their library
details without modifying the website.
> b) what are some possible future intended purposes and benefits?
Creates a single location for the data, which is currently duplicated
in several different places, and is often inconsistent. We might also
add more data, such as expected failures.
> c) why was json chosen rather than some xml schema. The reason I ask this
> is that your documentation build system is based on xml transforms.
My documentation build system? If it was up to me, the documentation
build wouldn't have been based on xsl.
> It seems
> to me that (not having answers to the a and b above) that a more natural
> choice for something like would be some xml schema.
It was originally in xml, because that's what the website uses. But
someone asked for json, and that seemed fine to me as I think people
find it easier to read and write.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk